From The Nation Trumps attack on media

M

Micawber

Verified User
The USA is not South Africa: Its democratic traditions are older, its legal protections for speech more absolute, its media more diverse and, despite the carnage in print journalism, vastly better resourced. And yet the features of an authoritarian populism, centered on the personality of a demagogic leader, are emerging with stunning rapidity here.

The day after he was inaugurated, Donald Trump made it clear that his “running war with the media” would continue into his presidency. “They are among the most dishonest human beings on earth,” he said of journalists in a speech at the CIA’s headquarters. He then sent his press secretary, Sean Spicer, out to berate the press for accurately reporting on the inauguration’s attendance and to fabulate numbers about crowd size. The next morning, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, introduced a spluttering Chuck Todd to “alternative facts” when he questioned her about Spicer’s lies on NBC’s Meet the Press. Four days later, with the sulfur of Trump’s first executive orders still hanging in the air, White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon gleefully told the press to “shut up” and then daubed it with the scarlet letter that authoritarians routinely bestow upon independent journalism: “the opposition party.” And so it went, compressing into days an assault that in other countries—Russia, Turkey, Venezuela, South Africa—has taken years.

https://www.thenation.com/article/trump-versus-the-media-how-to-cover-a-hostile-president/
 
this (below) found filed under the guise of "Trump is a dictator" (gonna take away your free press)

That adversarial posture doesn’t come easily to Washington journalists,
but at a moment when The New York Times feels constrained to take out advertisements for the truth during the Oscars,
it is now coming upon them willy-nilly.
Click to expand...
Note the term above (adversarial posture) used to describe the press's posture towards Trump.
The NYTimes called it advocacy journalism.

They look the same to me. A war on Trump by all means necessary to the ends of de-ligitimizaton/removal.

Is this why we need a free press? to act as a player in the politics of DC -when the press should be investigative
 
Micawber said:
The USA is not South Africa: Its democratic traditions are older, its legal protections for speech more absolute, its media more diverse and, despite the carnage in print journalism, vastly better resourced. And yet the features of an authoritarian populism, centered on the personality of a demagogic leader, are emerging with stunning rapidity here.

The day after he was inaugurated, Donald Trump made it clear that his “running war with the media” would continue into his presidency. “They are among the most dishonest human beings on earth,” he said of journalists in a speech at the CIA’s headquarters. He then sent his press secretary, Sean Spicer, out to berate the press for accurately reporting on the inauguration’s attendance and to fabulate numbers about crowd size. The next morning, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president, introduced a spluttering Chuck Todd to “alternative facts” when he questioned her about Spicer’s lies on NBC’s Meet the Press. Four days later, with the sulfur of Trump’s first executive orders still hanging in the air, White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon gleefully told the press to “shut up” and then daubed it with the scarlet letter that authoritarians routinely bestow upon independent journalism: “the opposition party.” And so it went, compressing into days an assault that in other countries—Russia, Turkey, Venezuela, South Africa—has taken years.

https://www.thenation.com/article/trump-versus-the-media-how-to-cover-a-hostile-president/
Click to expand...

What he said about the leftwing media is true. They are dishonest. Do you expect Trump to stand by and take it when they falsely attack him? You probably do but would have been up in arms had they done the same thing to your boy Obama. They wouldn't have done him like they do Trump because they wouldn't dare question the black guy.
 
im sorry you dont get to be a partisan arm for the democrats and claim to be sacrosant.

The media is fair game and it is entirely their fault.
 
CFM said:
What he said about the leftwing media is true. They are dishonest.
Click to expand...

When the Washington Post reports that President Trump made approximately 2000 false or misleading claims in his first year of office - and provides sourced details - are they being "dishonest" and "falsely attacking" him? What should they and the "leftwing media" have done instead?

Do you expect Trump to stand by and take it ...

I would hope - but not expect - that he would cut down on lying to the American people.
 
Darth Omar said:
Trump is the perfect remedy for today’s media.
Click to expand...

No, he is an attack on truth and supporter of the new unaccountable media of lies.

"Grandiose hostility to the press, performed as a kind of theater, is no longer a tool of voter mobilization for Trump; now he seeks to use it to undermine the basic information infrastructure of democracy. His ultimate target is accountability in the largest sense. No one who has covered other authoritarian leaders could have been surprised when President Trump ridiculed US District Court Judge James Robart for overturning his travel ban against the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries: “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Id
 
Micawber said:
No, he is an attack on truth and supporter of the new unaccountable media of lies.

"Grandiose hostility to the press, performed as a kind of theater, is no longer a tool of voter mobilization for Trump; now he seeks to use it to undermine the basic information infrastructure of democracy. His ultimate target is accountability in the largest sense. No one who has covered other authoritarian leaders could have been surprised when President Trump ridiculed US District Court Judge James Robart for overturning his travel ban against the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries: “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Id
Click to expand...


These kind of posters can only be putins bots
 
Micawber said:
No, he is an attack on truth and supporter of the new unaccountable media of lies.

"Grandiose hostility to the press, performed as a kind of theater, is no longer a tool of voter mobilization for Trump; now he seeks to use it to undermine the basic information infrastructure of democracy. His ultimate target is accountability in the largest sense. No one who has covered other authoritarian leaders could have been surprised when President Trump ridiculed US District Court Judge James Robart for overturning his travel ban against the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries: “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Id
Click to expand...

It actually is a ridicoulous standard. To take campaign statments as intent behind the law means that Obamacare would have been ruled unconstitutional.

In ruling against the travel ban the courts literally made a standard exclusive to Trump which is why the Supreme Court decision was 7-2 the other way.
 
tsuke said:
im sorry you dont get to be a partisan arm for the democrats and claim to be sacrosant.

The media is fair game and it is entirely their fault.
Click to expand...

No, it is partially their fault for emulating to a degree the new media lack of standards, the shit kind of fake news your kind listens to.
The "old" media that has old guard players and an institution in large measure reported facts and truth and of course that is a threat to
liars and thieves. So you attack it and created your own fake news built on a propaganda model of saying what the rich, religious and gun
constituencies want to hear said.

We listen to NPR, you listen to limbaugh or church radio. There may be a liberal bias (because you can't help being liberal if you are enlightened a wee bit) and you listen to total joberjabber horshit
"counter news" from fat uneducated hate mongers.
 
Last edited:
tsuke said:
It actually is a ridicoulous standard. To take campaign statments as intent behind the law means that Obamacare would have been ruled unconstitutional.

In ruling against the travel ban the courts literally made a standard exclusive to Trump which is why the Supreme Court decision was 7-2 the other way.
Click to expand...

You missed the point whether intentionally or not. Nic Dawes was pointing out a sitting Presidents direct attack of a sitting judge and the judiciary is unprecedented here but exactly what reporters who are well
traveled see in authoritarian banana republics

There is a process and Trump should no more call out a judge than a judge should call Trump a fascist racist piece of shit.
 
Micawber said:
No, he is an attack on truth and supporter of the new unaccountable media of lies.

"Grandiose hostility to the press, performed as a kind of theater, is no longer a tool of voter mobilization for Trump; now he seeks to use it to undermine the basic information infrastructure of democracy. His ultimate target is accountability in the largest sense. No one who has covered other authoritarian leaders could have been surprised when President Trump ridiculed US District Court Judge James Robart for overturning his travel ban against the citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries: “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Id
Click to expand...

That judge was rightly reversed by a higher court.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
When the Washington Post reports that President Trump made approximately 2000 false or misleading claims in his first year of office - and provides sourced details - are they being "dishonest" and "falsely attacking" him? What should they and the "leftwing media" have done instead?

Do you expect Trump to stand by and take it ...

I would hope - but not expect - that he would cut down on lying to the American people.
Click to expand...

Sourced details? Would those be the Never Trumpers or those that automatically hate him because he beat their bitch Hillary?
 
zymurgy said:
how many newspapers endorsed the current president?

opposition party sounds about right
Click to expand...

Many papers have supported Republian candidiates before. This guy is different. He was totally unqualified, unfit, ill suited and mentally deranged pussy grabbing
casino money, NY real estate (mobbed up) , multiple bankrupct TV clown. You aren't doing your job as a newspaper if you give a piece of shit like this a thumbs up.

Rubio, Bush, Kasich and Cruz probably were endorsed or certainly would have been.

Trump is a special case of unqualified and you know it.
 
Micawber said:
You missed the point whether intentionally or not. Nic Dawes was pointing out a sitting Presidents direct attack of a sitting judge and the judiciary is unprecedented here but exactly what reporters who are well
traveled see in authoritarian banana republics

There is a process and Trump should no more call out a judge than a judge should call Trump a fascist racist piece of shit.
Click to expand...

The judge essentially said that in his ruling.

And his ruling was rightly thrown into the judicial wastebasket where it belongs.
 
Micawber said:
No, it is partially their fault for emulating to a degree the new media lack of standards, the shit kind of fake news your kind listens to.
The "old" media that has old guard players and an institution in large measure reported facts and truth and of course that is a threat to
liars and thieves. So you attack it and created your own fake news built on a propaganda model of saying what the rich, religious and gun
constituencies want to hear said.

We listen to NPR, you listen to limbaugh or church radio. There may be a liberal bias (because you can't help being liberal if you are enlightened a wee bit) and you listen to total joberjabber horshit
"counter news" from fat uneducated hate mongers.
Click to expand...

I occasionally attempt to stomach a few minutes of The 700 Club on one of the local indie stations right after our local morning news ends.

A few minutes of Pat Robertson's doddering drool is about all I can take before the bile begins to rise and I have to change the channel to avoid upchucking my breakfast. Happened to take in a couple of minutes just this morning. Thankfully, it was one Pat's frequent days off, but nonetheless, I had to change the channel after a few minutes of their other anchors began gleefully spouting off about how and all the reasons why the pervert scumbag Dumpster Donnie is so wildly popular amongst evangelicals, cementing my view of evangelicals as a bunch of phony baloney droolers who haven't got the slightest notion of what Jesus is supposed to represent.
 
Micawber said:
Many papers have supported Republian candidiates before. This guy is different. He was totally unqualified, unfit, ill suited and mentally deranged pussy grabbing
casino money, NY real estate (mobbed up) , multiple bankrupct TV clown. You aren't doing your job as a newspaper if you give a piece of shit like this a thumbs up.

Rubio, Bush, Kasich and Cruz probably were endorsed or certainly would have been.

Trump is a special case of unqualified and you know it.
Click to expand...

he was still supported by about half the voting population. Yet newspapers, which should function as a voice for the community it serves, universally went another direction.

ps Liary Rotten was by far the most un-deserving candidate in my lifetime, and you damn well know it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top