09-22-2017, 02:25 PM
(09-22-2017, 01:48 PM)Benton Wrote: Part of the problem, IMO, is you report what the story is.
Right now, Trump is President. He's the story. He's making some good decisions and a lot of questionable ones. He's honoring some campaign promises, he's backing out of others. It's news because he is the POTUS. Same way as when Obama was POTUS, his decisions were examined, his commitments questioned. To me, that's where bias comes in.
If an outlet has a "negative" story on Trump, maybe it's because they're just reporting what he did or didn't do; it's up to the reader to determine if it's a good thing or bad thing. Like the wall. First it was 'I'm building a wall, and they're paying for it.' You know the progression from there. It's newsworthy because he's — from the sound of it — given up on the issue, which was a big deal to some of his constituents. It's not negative, it's just his action and how you, the media user, interpret it. Personally, I think the wall is a giant waste of money, so I view the stories as positive.
But the bias comes in with outlets that, instead of doing anything or downplaying whenever a new issue with the wall comes up, they just focus on something else... like emails or Obama or some other irrelevant issue.
And the same is true across the board. Like the 'Trump gets too many scoops of ice cream' story. Surely there was something more newsworthy. But that was one far end of the spectrum, just like the pro-Trump coverups are on the other far end. I think the bulk of news is somewhere in the middle. We just interpret it one way or the other based off our own prejudices.
See the thing is, I would have no problem if it were just news outlets reporting on Trump's actions and leaving interpretation of those actions up to the reader. Way too often, they put a negative spin on everything the man does. Even things that would seemingly be viewed as a positive are spun into a negative. I realize there's plenty of negative to talk about (I feel that way about every president), but when you constantly put a negative spin on everything and highlight nothing positive, I start to tune out. There is a distinct difference in the way Trump and Bush were/are treated by the media compared to the way Obama was treated.
It's not just Trump though. Most sports sites have praised Kaepernick as a hero and feigned ignorance as to why there's backlash. Bruce Jenner wins the courage award over more worthy candidates. Hundreds of sports and news outlets refusing to say "Redskins" or railing against that Dan Snyder for refusing to change the name. North Carolina was slammed for the bathroom bill. These are just a few of the bigger examples, but anytime sports sites (or news sites) get political these days, it seems they side with the left point of view, rather than maintaining a neutral stance and recognizing that many of their viewers/readers are on the other side of that moral fence.
(09-22-2017, 01:49 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, but I don't think it makes up for disparaging POW's.
I think his actions as a President are more important than his words as a citizen.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
