Do you ever get the feeling that the Mainstream Media isn’t “reporting” any news for you? Well, according to one journalist, they’re not.
So, then, exactly who is the MSM reporting for, reporting to?
This is news?
Back in 2014, Katie Couric interviewed Chelsea Clinton who had, just six weeks prior, given birth to her first child. Couric fawned and gushed over Chelsea Clinton to a bizarre degree. Couric also lauded Clinton for being nominated as one of Glamour Magazine’s “Woman of the Year” candidates. Then Couric added, “and I think it’s safe to say, probably a Mom of the Year.”
Viewers scratched their heads, perplexed.
The waiters know well Trump’s personal preferences. As he settles down, they bring him a Diet Coke, while the rest of us are served water, with the Vice President sitting at one end of the table. With the salad course, Trump is served what appears to be Thousand Island dressing instead of the creamy vinaigrette for his guests. When the chicken arrives, he is the only one given an extra dish of sauce. At the dessert course, he gets two scoops of vanilla ice cream with his chocolate cream pie, instead of the single scoop for everyone else.
Other outlets ran with the story. Several used the President’s ice cream preferences as an opportunity to psychologize him, such as the New York Times with an article entitled Donald Trump à la Mode. Elite Daily declared, Trump’s White House Eating Habits Reveal A Lot About Him. Mother Jones suggested, If You Want to Understand Donald Trump, Pay Attention to What He Eats.
Meanwhile, those of us regular folk simply thought to ourselves, “Who cares?”
The media’s obsession with the President’s dietary preferences continued with a December (2017) article in the New York Times, entitled INSIDe TRUMP’S HOUR-BY-HOUR BATTLE FOR SELF-PRESERVATION. The story claimed President Trump consumed 12 diet cokes each day.
Cable news outlets and MSM publications ran with the 12 Diet Cokes angle, most of them theorizing about the state of the President’s physical health.
Newsweek ran a story entitled TRUMP DRINKS 12 DIET COKES A DAY. WHAT CAN THAT DO TO A PERSON’S BODY?
Again, normal people simply thought to ourselves, “Who cares?” and continued with our daily lives.
Whose interests are being served?
Writing at The Hill back in August of 2017, David E. Weisberg insightfully posed two questions:
♦Who exactly is the media serving with these stories?
♦Whose interests are being served other than their own?
His astute inquiry was prompted by two articles which had been published in the midst of the human crisis and natural disaster following Hurricane Harvey: the New York Times’s Melania Trump, Off to Texas, Finds Herself on Thin Heels, and the Washington Post’s There was no pretense about Melania Trump’s heels. But sometimes, a little pretense helps.
Both articles were desperate attempts to politically frame Melania Trump’s choice of footwear, a pair of heels which she had worn as she and the President boarded Air Force One on their way to visit the hurricane victims.
So, WHO are these stories for, exactly?
Sharyl Attkisson is an award-winning investigative journalist. In Chapter 6 of her new book, The Smear, Attkisson gives us a glimpse into why the Mainstream Media puts out stories and runs with headline topics which the average person cares nothing about; stories like CNN’s Kim Jong Un’s sister is stealing the show at the Winter Olympics.
According to Attkisson, journalists have forgotten all about you and me. Actually, we are simply ignored altogether.
On pages 151-152 of her book, Attkisson writes (emphasis mine):
We report on internal info fed to us by opposing interests to advance their agenda. We report on one another. We report on each other reporting on these interests. The resulting stories are aggregated, circulated, and regurgitated among the same relatively small circle of players. They’re retweeted on Twitter, shared and liked on Facebook, and distributed on Google News. They draw positive feedback from our managers, generate validation from peers, and capture the attention of important insiders. Instead of bringing meaningful news to viewers and readers, we copy, impress, or best one another with stories of interest to no one but each other.
We’re giving a command performance… And we’re leaving ordinary Americans out of the equation.
On a Venn diagram, there would be three circles: The news media and insiders we report on would be two circles that wholly overlap. Regular people would be in a third circle far away that doesn’t intersect the other two.
Hmm… The detachment of the elites from everyday Americans, coupled with the Mainstream Media’s caricature of Journalism is starting to make a lot more sense…
You and I simply aren’t part of their equation.
The real reason Ocasio-Cortez is afraid of the press
For at least the second time, reporters were barred from covering an event featuring Socialist Democratic darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The campaign’s reason: we want attendees to feel comfortable since there’s so much national press covering her.
This is an absolutely ridiculous excuse, of course. Nobody goes to a campaign event without knowing the press will (should) be there. It doesn’t make them less comfortable and may actually give some a sense of security knowing the answers to their questions will be judged by more than the audience at hand. That’s one of the reasons for the press in the first place, to give information about an event to people who cannot attend.
Instead, the press is getting another roadblock:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Democratic socialist star running for New York’s 14th congressional district, is facing criticism after her campaign banned journalists from covering a town hall meeting with voters this week.
The Queens Chronicle, a local news outlet, reported that the campaign for the 28-year-old progressive prevented reporters from attending a campaign event in Corona on Sunday, even though it was open to the rest of the public. The campaign reportedly barred reporters from a prior event as well.
It’s conspicuous that a local publication was barred because it runs contrary to the narrative the campaign is trying to sell. So why is she being hidden from reporters at these types of events?
It’s clear that her exposure is her best friend and worst enemy. Being talked about is a politician’s best friend on the campaign trail, but it also offers a risk of failure. This is most common in events like the town hall meetings she is holding because she’ll be forced to think on her feet.
What if she can’t think on her feet? What if her answers when placed in an unscripted situation the type of answers many would expect from an inexperienced socialist?
Until she’s ready to handle the pressure of having press cover these events, she won’t be ready to hold public office at this level. The House of Representatives isn’t for people who need to be protected from their own answers.
Mainstream media wants you to believe the GOP’s sky is falling
The best job in the world is being an election analyst. You can say whatever you want as long as you give semi-valid reasons and even if you’re wrong, it will be unexpected factors that prevented you from being correct.
We got a glimpse of this before, during, and after the 2016 presidential election when hundreds, perhaps thousands of election analysts chimed in on various media outlets. First, we heard a steady chant about why Hillary Clinton would win. Then we got to see the shocked and occasionally tearful expressions on their faces on election day. It continued after the election when these analysts were put on the air to explain what went wrong.
Now, we’re seeing it all over again, albeit at a lesser scale. In the weeks leading up to the midterm elections, we’re already seeing crazy predictions by major commentators and news outlets claiming huge victories for the Democrats. Here’s a good example from The Hill:
If that pattern holds in November, the worst-case scenario for the GOP is a truly historic wipeout of as many as 72 House seats, according to The Hill’s analysis of special election results and congressional and presidential returns from 2016.
That would mark the deepest decline for either party in a single election cycle since Harry Truman ran against the “Do Nothing Congress” in 1948.
To The Hill’s credit, they noted that this worst-case-scenario is unlikely for many reasons. Nevertheless, this is a society driven by headlines and news snippets. The point wasn’t to explain later in the article why it won’t happen. They wanted to get clicks. The easiest way to do so is with shocking headlines and bold predictions.
Is it possible that the GOP will experience this “wipeout?” Absolutely. They’ve done such a horrendous job at passing their core legislation and are now pandering to moderates and independents in a last ditch effort to finish the legislative session with some wins.
Bottom line: Anyone who claims to know what’s going to happen on election day is trying to sell you something. Until it happens, they’re all just grasping at straws.
David Limbaugh asked the right question:
Does anyone really believe this? https://t.co/REb4klA505
— David Limbaugh (@DavidLimbaugh) August 17, 2018
Idiotic mainstream media feeds Trump the goodwill motherload
The tenacity by which mainstream media wants to stop President Trump is comical. It’s even dangerous at times. Sadly, they keep shooting themselves in the foot by giving their target all the ammunition he needs to continue taking them down.
Their latest attempt at defending freedom of the press and bashing the President for attacking it comes in the form of a coordinated attack. That statement alone is enough to make more people realize their bias and justify Trump’s claims that the press is the enemy. They can attempt to spin it any way they want, but the results will be the same. They’re helping Trump.
From The Martha’s Vineyard Times to the Dallas Morning News… from the Yankton County Observer in South Dakota to the Bangor Daily News in Maine… the papers will all run editorials as part of an effort first proposed by the Boston Globe earlier this month.
Marjorie Pritchard, the Globe’s deputy editorial page editor, told CNN that more papers were still “signing on” for the effort as of Wednesday afternoon.
This smells bad. I’m not a Trump supporter, yet I grimace at the attempt by mainstream media to take him down. It’s not that he doesn’t deserve it; it isn’t his place to lead the charge against mainstream media. That’s my job, and yours. Instead, the President should be spending time gaining a better understanding of the effects of tariffs and learning how to handle foreign affairs like a statesman. Unhinged journalists and kneeling football players are below the office of the President of the United States.
Nevertheless, he attacks. They attack back. Rinse. Repeat.
This is very similar to what National Review attempted in early 2016 when they gathered a bunch of respected conservative journalists to speak out against the President. Titled “Against Trump,” the issue had dozens of conservatives giving their reasons why we shouldn’t support Trump to be the Republican nominee. It failed miserably. His popularity skyrocketed and it helped to seal the fate of candidates who tried to prevent his ascension.
The current situation is worse. Instead of dozens, it’s hundreds of editorial writers and publications making a concerted effort to expose Trump and his backwards perspectives on freedom of the press. Instead of pulling the nation against him, they will only plant people more firmly in their own beliefs. Trump detractors will get a false sense of victory while Trump supporters will say, “See, he was right all along.”
No minds will be changed by these hundreds of articles. Worldviews will be solidified. More attacks from the White House against mainstream media will be justified. Valid complaints about the President by all journalists will be tainted. In short, the media is handing the President the best present they can give him. They’re proving his point.
Goodwill is generated for people who are perceived as being treated unfairly. By “ganging up” on Trump with coordinated attacks, mainstream media is making even lukewarm Trump supporters much more sympathetic towards him.
The worst part about all this is there are legitimate complaints about the President that will be diminished by mainstream media’s coordinated attacks. They are adding fuel to the fake news fire. Maybe it makes them feel good now, but it’s counterproductive at best.