Trump II

[pegelli]

Whether it was a gaggle or not, the story was newsworthy as is the singling out of certain news organizations by the President as purveyors of fake news. 

I'm not saying it's not newsworthy, it is. But the ratio of what makes it to the European news vs. the real issues is out of wack. Fortunately the papers you cite seem to have struck a better balance.

[pegelli]

I strongly disagree. The selective exclusion (because they wanted to push back at those selected media) of members of the free press / media to partake in an exchange of firsthand information is a step in undermining parts of the constitution. That is a big deal!

The more informal setting of a so-called gaggle (I thought only birds like geese gaggle) was because they didn't want to draw video coverage away from Trump's performance on CPAC. The White House has a core pool of media that covers press briefings and then those media are asked to share that news with other media

Sean Spicer expanded the number of invited media and then (oh what a surprise) there was not enough room for all to attend, so he selectively excluded some of the core group. This is unprecedented.

The press do also speak about other subjects, but this is a major change in how the government communicates with the people of the USA, through selected media. It is an attempt at censorship, in the assumption that media will become less critical in the hope of getting invited next time.

Even Foxnews propaganda was surprised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOAD0_Ito8E

Cheers,
Bart

Maybe you're right, but previous administrations have also selectively invited media organizations to these informal gaggles (maybe you're analogy with geese is right "birds of a feather flock together ) . Let's see if the ones excluded now also get dis-invited to the official White House press briefings, if that happens you're right, that is unprecedented and it's a step in the direction of censorship.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

How memories tend to fade. Or is it fairer to say how partisan our memories are? Nobody seems to remember how Obama was doing the same thing to Fox, or preferring to "gaggle" with the lefties?

[Chris Kern]

Actually, I think it could plausibly be argued that Trump has made the mainstream American News Media Great Again.  He is responsible for a surge in newspaper subscriptions and a spike in television news viewership.  (Admittedly, that's just a metaphorical drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what he has done for late-night TV comedy programs. . . . )

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Actually, I think it could plausibly be argued that Trump has made the mainstream American News Media Great Again.  He is responsible for a surge in newspaper subscriptions and a spike in television news viewership.  (Admittedly, that's just a metaphorical drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what he has done for late-night TV comedy programs. . . . )

Hey, he did promise to protect American jobs 

[Alan Goldhammer]

Actually, I think it could plausibly be argued that Trump has made the mainstream American News Media Great Again.  He is responsible for a surge in newspaper subscriptions and a spike in television news viewership.  (Admittedly, that's just a metaphorical drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what he has done for late-night TV comedy programs. . . . )

Yes, that is correct.  New York Times has reported numbers as they are a publicly held company.  Also, contributions to The Guardian, ProPublica, and other reporting sites has increased as well. 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

How memories tend to fade. Or is it fairer to say how partisan our memories are? Nobody seems to remember how Obama was doing the same thing to Fox, or preferring to "gaggle" with the lefties?

Could you help me with finding sources that point to selectively excluding certain media that were included before, just because they are critical? I don't think that the 'gaggling' itself is controversial, but the censorship is.

Cheers,
Bart

[Robert Roaldi]

Another interesting personal story.

[Alan Klein]

...Regarding Obama's dislike for Fox news, he did complain about them, but never went off on a lengthy tirade or called them out endlessly as the purveyor of 'fake news.'

That's because the rest of the media supported Obama.  He only had Fox against him.  The situation is reversed for Trump and past conservative and Republican politicians.  They have 90% of the press against them. 

[Robert Roaldi]

An interesting (but not free) personal documentary.

[Alan Klein]

I read both the Washington Post and NY Times every morning....

Why bother? Their bias to the left is the same.  You're getting the same slant.   It might be helpful to read a conservative newspaper along with a liberal one.  Do you only watch CNN and MSNBC? 

[Alan Klein]

I would have no problem with it if he would use logical arguments. Every story has a counter story. But he's using fake news, alternative facts, lies, dodging the real questions and bullying. Very unworthy of the US commander in chief.

The liberal press isn't use to politicians taking them on.  His supporters appreciate that finally someone they support is willing to do so.  That's why he won the election.  After Obama's weakness, we need a Commander-in Chief who defends America and is willing to kick ass.  Foreigners may not like it, but they don't vote. 

[Alan Klein]

Actually, I think it could plausibly be argued that Trump has made the mainstream American News Media Great Again.  He is responsible for a surge in newspaper subscriptions and a spike in television news viewership.  (Admittedly, that's just a metaphorical drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what he has done for late-night TV comedy programs. . . . )

That's a great point.  All the news media, on all sides, are making more money than ever with viewership and readership hitting records.

Which brings up another theory I have.  That individual outlets really don't care about their political viewpoints any longer.  They stick to left or right because that's what their viewers expect.  If they added balance, they would lose customers.  So they continue to slant they way their viewers want them too, maybe more so, to keep the hype going.  And we cheer on like Romans at the games demanding more blood.

[BrownBear]

I've despised the man for over 30 years. No amount of Russian influence can change that.

[Rob C]

I've despised the man for over 30 years. No amount of Russian influence can change that.

He used to be in ¡Hola! with the other wife of earlier days - Ivana: Czech lady; the latest iteration, Melania is from Slovenia... What is it with all this un-American attraction? Will Putin go on to make it a whole new kinda love?

Stay tooned foks, stay tooned!

Rob

[Alan Goldhammer]

Why bother? Their bias to the left is the same.  You're getting the same slant.   It might be helpful to read a conservative newspaper along with a liberal one.  Do you only watch CNN and MSNBC?

The only thing I watch on television is European football (soccer).  I don't watch television news.  Washington Post has the largest roster of conservative op ed writers of any newspaper that I am aware of and I read all their columns, especially Jennifer Rubin's 'Right Turn' blog.  I do not believe the news articles in either paper your cite are biased in the sense they are taking a partisan position.  Both have made extensive efforts to understand the Trump voter in many of the battle ground areas.

You can and probably will take what I have said with a grain of salt as I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of Republicans I have voted for (been voting since the 1968 election and have never missed voting even in local elections).

[Alan Klein]

An interesting (but not free) personal documentary.

I only watched the trailer which makes the point that Fox changed many people's liberal viewpoints and see the other side.  That's true.  But what's bad about that?  For decades, when there was only broadcast TV and no cable, the media favored mainly liberal and Democrat viewpoints.  Along came cable which gave a chance for the other side to present their conservative views.  That's democracy and freedom of speech and freedom of the press at work.  So we should go back to when only one side is presented?  That's what the whole discussion about the FCC banning Fox news was all about.  Liberals attempt to silence the other side.  Only liberal news is authentic.  Only liberal thought is pure. 

You see that on the campus today with colleges shutting down conservative thought, conservative conferences, etc under the guise that people are getting hurt, that somehow it's just plain wrong.  Like with the liberal media, only liberal thought is proper, that political correctness excludes conservative viewpoints.  That we all have to march to liberal group think like Soviet news organs.  Well, the conservative right has awaken.  And they have Trump as their champion.  Malapropisms, dangling modifiers, hyperbole,  orange hair and all. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Could you help me with finding sources...

I can, but then you'd dismiss it because they'd be, in your opinion, "fake news" or right-wing propaganda.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...the other wife of earlier days - Ivana: Czech lady; the latest iteration, Melania is from Slovenia... What is it with all this un-American attraction?...

Further proof that immigrants are taking American jobs!

[stamper]

Further proof that immigrants are taking American jobs!

Ironic?