10-03-2018, 05:30 PM
(10-03-2018, 04:13 PM)Dill Wrote: Three things, Balls:Hey Dill thanks for your explanation. I just have a hard time wrapping my head around the "liberal media" talking point that I have been hearing for decades. As you said above the negative reports were coming. If those reports are true and based on fact however, why does that make the reporting "bias"? Is it because the particular news organization who reported it is considered liberal? What makes a news organization liberal?
1. I don't think any of the reputable news agencies wants to "get back" at Trump for attacking them. It's not like one school boy called another a name and so naturally the other responds in kind. They ARE disturbed, however, that the man occupying the highest office in the land is behaving like that--like a schoolboy. Along with other rash and uniformed behaviors, the press baiting points to a problem for the country, not a spat between two parties. No doubt most all responsible journalists would like to see Trump gone, but not because he called them names.
2. I don't think the latest dirt on Trump is "payback." The reporters involved have been following Trump for years. What they have discovered about his finances and lifetime of doubling--if it is not "made up," then it is important for the public to know the character of the man leading the executive.
3. So I think "f'n" with the media is really neither here nor there. In the short run, it has served Trump well. Many reporters were afraid to tangle with him. Normally respectable papers like the WSJ were rather soft on him for decades. Dissing the responsible media fit an already developed narrative about the liberal press. Trump just needed to massage that in his favor, encouraging his followers to believe that institutions like the FBI and CIA could actually be "out to get' a president or candidate. He was speaking to people who, when they hear that contact with Russians (including spies) led to surveillance of Trump campaign members, totally miss the CONTACT WITH THE RUSSIANS part, and just imagine OBAMA out to get Trump (they'd been warned for years he was a dictator!). Like he could just order the FBI to do that for him. Trump's actions help create a media sphere in which Alex Jones' version of Trump can compete on equal footing with the NYT's. Very bad for the country, but good for holding onto power, keeping Congressional protection rather than oversight, etc.
Whether he "f'd" with the media or not, the negative reports were coming sooner or later, once he declared his candidacy, because of the kind of person Trump is and what he has done all his adult life, and because presidents--all presidents--get the deepest and most long term scrutiny from the press. As they should.
Most of the journalist and reporters there are democrats? The owner is democrat? If Fox news just reports positive reports about Republicans, wouldn't that make them "bias" also? Thanks!
