"Fabricate" is a very strong word. It implies in this case that major news sources are deliberately disseminating disinformation. Whither democracy, if more and more people come to believe this? Can it be that a chief exec constantly repeating claims can make them "true""
Poll: 46 percent think media make up stories about Trump http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/18/trump-media-fake-news-poll-243884 Nearly half of voters, 46 percent, believe the news media fabricate news stories about President Donald Trump and his administration, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll.
Just 37 percent of voters think the media do not fabricate stories, the poll shows, while the remaining 17 percent are undecided.. . .
But voters diverge from the president on whether the federal government should be able to punish news organizations that he believes make up stories about him. Trump last week suggested the government could revoke NBC’s broadcast licenses.
Thank heaven only 28% think the government should have the power to shut down news sources of which the chief exec disapproves.
Only 28 percent think the government should have the power to revoke broadcast licenses of major news organizations that it says are fabricating news stories about a president or the administration, while 51 percent think the government should not be able to do that. Another 21 percent are undecided.
Voters are split along party lines on this question, too. More than two-thirds of Democrats, 68 percent, think the federal government should not have the power to revoke broadcast licenses of those organizations. But more Republicans, 46 percent, think the government should have that power than the third of GOP voters who don’t think so.
“Voters, particularly Trump supporters, have become disenchanted with the national media,” said Kyle Dropp, chief research officer and co-founder of Morning Consult. “Even 20 percent of Democrats think that the national media fabricate stories on President Trump and his administration. That being said, many are still not willing to let the federal government censor the media.”
Hello. So let me get this straight. What exactly do you mean by MSM? I watch mostly CNN and MSNBC. I watch them every night report on what Trump tweeted or said in a speech or press conference. Its right there for everyone to see and hear. They then have a panel on to discuss his latest comments. What is Fabricated? They report what Trump himself says. What is so hard about this?
That’s part of why cnn and other agencies with an agenda do themselves more harm than good with stories like “trump has three scoops of ice cream; wife has two.”
(10-24-2017, 09:05 AM)Benton Wrote: That’s part of why cnn and other agencies with an agenda do themselves more harm than good with stories like “trump has three scoops of ice cream; wife has two.”
Serious question: Did they run a fill story on it or was it just part of a story on an interview the POTUS did?
There were actual news segments (multiple) when Pres Obama wore a tan suit so I'm looking for equivalency here.
Although it's still not "fabricated" news if it is true.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(10-24-2017, 09:11 AM)GMDino Wrote: Serious question: Did they run a fill story on it or was it just part of a story on an interview the POTUS did?
There were actual news segments (multiple) when Pres Obama wore a tan suit so I'm looking for equivalency here.
Although it's still not "fabricated" news if it is true.
CNN was reporting on Time's interview. They took a brief part of a very long story and made it the centerpiece.
And tan suit stories (don't recall that one, but I do remember the stink about tie pins) are a similar problem. Instead of focusing on the inability to get anything done or going back on his pledge to get out of the Middle East, Fox focused on dumb things like lapel pins or using mustard.
Elected officials need to be held accountable for the things they do and don't do. One of them lies or backs off a pledge? Hold them accountable. Make that the headline. Force them to do what they said they were going to do. Stop burying thing with "POTUS eats mustard" or "POTUS eats ice cream."
(10-24-2017, 10:16 AM)Benton Wrote: CNN was reporting on Time's interview. They took a brief part of a very long story and made it the centerpiece.
And tan suit stories (don't recall that one, but I do remember the stink about tie pins) are a similar problem. Instead of focusing on the inability to get anything done or going back on his pledge to get out of the Middle East, Fox focused on dumb things like lapel pins or using mustard.
Elected officials need to be held accountable for the things they do and don't do. One of them lies or backs off a pledge? Hold them accountable. Make that the headline. Force them to do what they said they were going to do. Stop burying thing with "POTUS eats mustard" or "POTUS eats ice cream."
Three years ago Republicans lost their minds over the President of the United States wearing a tan suit pic.twitter.com/hD3DnDBxiW
I'm not arguing that focusing on ice cream or tan suits isn't bad. I was just wondering if it happened the same way or is perceived that way.
My old college roommate and I got together over the weekend. He's very conservative...I am not (shocker, I know).
Anyway we always talk politics eventually and it's usually pretty civil. But he kept talking about individual stories to "prove" what the "left" was doing. And a couple of them he had the story wrong and it was his perception of how it was covered. He didn't want to admit that. Now I also had one that I had perceived wrong and he corrected me.
At the end of the day we always agree that if elected officials could sit down and talk like the rest of us there would be fewer problems/fights...but they can't come to agreements like we do because we are not running for office or trying to raise money and keep power.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(10-23-2017, 06:07 PM)Dill Wrote: "Fabricate" is a very strong word. It implies in this case that major news sources are deliberately disseminating disinformation. Whither democracy, if more and more people come to believe this? Can it be that a chief exec constantly repeating claims can make them "true""
Poll: 46 percent think media make up stories about Trump http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/18/trump-media-fake-news-poll-243884 Nearly half of voters, 46 percent, believe the news media fabricate news stories about President Donald Trump and his administration, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll.
Just 37 percent of voters think the media do not fabricate stories, the poll shows, while the remaining 17 percent are undecided.. . .
But voters diverge from the president on whether the federal government should be able to punish news organizations that he believes make up stories about him. Trump last week suggested the government could revoke NBC’s broadcast licenses.
Thank heaven only 28% think the government should have the power to shut down news sources of which the chief exec disapproves.
Only 28 percent think the government should have the power to revoke broadcast licenses of major news organizations that it says are fabricating news stories about a president or the administration, while 51 percent think the government should not be able to do that. Another 21 percent are undecided.
Voters are split along party lines on this question, too. More than two-thirds of Democrats, 68 percent, think the federal government should not have the power to revoke broadcast licenses of those organizations. But more Republicans, 46 percent, think the government should have that power than the third of GOP voters who don’t think so.
“Voters, particularly Trump supporters, have become disenchanted with the national media,” said Kyle Dropp, chief research officer and co-founder of Morning Consult. “Even 20 percent of Democrats think that the national media fabricate stories on President Trump and his administration. That being said, many are still not willing to let the federal government censor the media.”
This is what we've been trying to tell you for quite some time.
Now if only you would concede the MSM was clearly in the tank for Hillary trying to sway the election in her favor.
(10-24-2017, 10:53 AM)Vlad Wrote: This is what we've been trying to tell you for quite some time.
Now if only you would concede the MSM was clearly in the tank for Hillary trying to sway the election in her favor.
I don't know why the MSM would portray Clinton as competent, prepared and experienced and Trump as unprepared, inexperienced and childish.
I mean unless they just reported what they said and did.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(10-24-2017, 09:05 AM)Benton Wrote: That’s part of why cnn and other agencies with an agenda do themselves more harm than good with stories like “trump has three scoops of ice cream; wife has two.”
(10-24-2017, 09:05 AM)Benton Wrote: That’s part of why cnn and other agencies with an agenda do themselves more harm than good with stories like “trump has three scoops of ice cream; wife has two.”
Lest we forget that Trump eats fried chicken with a fork.
(10-24-2017, 06:33 AM)ballsofsteel Wrote: I watch mostly CNN and MSNBC.
I'm stunned by this revelation, stunned I say.
(10-24-2017, 09:05 AM)Benton Wrote: That’s part of why cnn and other agencies with an agenda do themselves more harm than good with stories like “trump has three scoops of ice cream; wife has two.”
Exactly right. I think the story that did the most damage to CNN's credibility, on anything to do with Trump, was when they tracked down the guy who posted the CNN wrestling gif. The insane level of disconnect and self importance, coupled with their thinly veiled threat to dox the guy if he ever displeased them again, sunk them permanently, for many, as a source for credible news.
(10-24-2017, 10:56 AM)GMDino Wrote: I don't know why the MSM would portray Clinton as competent, prepared and experienced and Trump as unprepared, inexperienced and childish.
I mean unless they just reported what they said and did.
Um...they reported what they wanted you to hear. You know that's true.
Did they portray the community organizer in '08 as unprepared and inexperienced?
No, they portrayed him as the Messiah.
Portraying is one thing, but blatant over the top bullshit like this is unacceptable.
CNN reporter: "The key states WE really need...er that Hillary Clinton really needs...." lol
Over the last 4-8 yrs. the Islamic extremists known as ISIS have been at the forefront of the news on almost a daily basis.
Taking that into account, you would expect that it's near defeat would be making the front pages as well.
Raqqa has been retaken and ISIS themselves are now refugees escaping into refugee camps.
Why is it not being reported on a grander scale?
Because Trump is president, and we wouldn't want anything to conflict with the illusion that nothing is getting done under this president. Giving this president credit for anything is taboo.
I have to somewhat agree with this Newsweek article.
Trump did play a part in the defeat of ISIS by giving our military leaders free reign rather than having them report to the White House before any strategic move can be undertaken.
Giving free reign is a campaign promise Trump made if you recall.
(10-24-2017, 11:46 AM)Vlad Wrote: Over the last 4-8 yrs. the Islamic extremists known as ISIS have been at the forefront of the news on almost a daily basis.
Taking that into account, you would expect that it's near defeat would be making the front pages as well.
Raqqa has been retaken and ISIS themselves are now refugees escaping into refugee camps.
Why is it not being reported on a grander scale?
Because Trump is president, and we wouldn't want anything to conflict with the illusion that nothing is getting done under this president. Giving this president credit for anything is taboo.
I have to somewhat agree with this Newsweek article.
Trump did play a part in the defeat of ISIS by giving our military leaders free reign rather than having them report to the White House before any strategic move can be undertaken.
Giving free reign is a campaign promise Trump made if you recall.
So a link about the story is in your post about how the story isn't being talked about enough?
Trump changed one thing (thank Jebus) in that he kept himself out of the decision making process. I'm betting that's more to do with him not understanding anything and not wanting to learn along with a chance for him to deny he had anything to do with anything that goes wrong.
The rest is still everything Obama had in place.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(10-24-2017, 11:54 AM)GMDino Wrote: So a link about the story is in your post about how the story isn't being talked about enough?
Yes. Exactly.
The reasons I have made clear.
Here again you cherry pick my post and choose to ignore the point...being ISIS media coverage before and after Trump.
Don't recall any of you creating a thread about the defeat of ISIS , do you?
We wouldn't want to imply that Trump should be getting credit now would we.
(10-24-2017, 11:46 AM)Vlad Wrote: Over the last 4-8 yrs. the Islamic extremists known as ISIS have been at the forefront of the news on almost a daily basis.
Taking that into account, you would expect that it's near defeat would be making the front pages as well.
Raqqa has been retaken and ISIS themselves are now refugees escaping into refugee camps.
Why is it not being reported on a grander scale?
Because Trump is president, and we wouldn't want anything to conflict with the illusion that nothing is getting done under this president. Giving this president credit for anything is taboo.
I have to somewhat agree with this Newsweek article.
Trump did play a part in the defeat of ISIS by giving our military leaders free reign rather than having them report to the White House before any strategic move can be undertaken.
Giving free reign is a campaign promise Trump made if you recall.
One- There's been investigations into whistleblower accounts that reports on successes and failures with ISIS were intentionally altered by CentComm to paint a different picture of what's been going on in the Middle East.
Two- A lot of folks learned their lesson after puffing out chests and in front of "Mission Accomplished" banners. You can defeat ISIS, and that's great. Just like al Qaeda and the groups that came before, you'll have a group of the same usual suspects that move on to the next group. ISIS is a bunch of miserable, pathetic people doing horrible things. And once we "win" against them, there will be another group with many of the same miserable, pathetic people doing horrible things under a different name.
Which is why we need to get out of the Middle East, dump tons of money into finding an energy resource to tap into and tell that part of the world to sort out its problems.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/ulVdgX6.jpg)
![[Image: icecram.gif]](https://s1.postimg.org/4glyhiixqn/icecram.gif)
![[Image: head-in-the-sand.jpg]](https://s1.postimg.org/8qml14holb/head-in-the-sand.jpg)
