General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy is the press starting to favor trump?
Starting to slowly but surely see "well he just didn't know it was wrong" narrative slip into comments from press. Starting to see a "he said-he said" narrative slip in. The "illegal leak" arguement getting more traction.
I have seen it on MSNBC and CNN.
I am starting to suspect that they are trying to draw this out and go to the "both sides are the same" line to keep ratings up and draw out controversy in what is more and more a slam dunk case against trump.
They will now switch gears to save trump to keep him around for ratings as long as possible.
So, yet again, the press is going to fuck the American people for ratings and money. Expect to see trump for years to come and watch him burn our world to the ground.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)angrychair
(8,733 posts)But it doesn't matter...that is for the low information voter to illicit a sympathetic response. It's not for people that know that is not an excuse.
global1
(25,272 posts)LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)Further supports the narrative that he is/was/will be unfit to hold the high office of POTUS. Honestly he is unfit to qualify as a human.
YCHDT
(962 posts)MousePlayingDaffodil
(748 posts). . . could be considered "good" or not. But what I do know is that the televised "press" isn't in the business of journalism.
What one sees on television (and, for that matter, hears on radio) is a show. Just a show. Like "Little House on the Prairie" or "Star Trek." A show. They look to put on what they think people will watch, that's all.
That there are people who still don't understand that surprises me.
Yonnie3
(17,491 posts)The viewers are the product that the media sells. The advertisers are the customers. Some viewers just don't get that they aren't the customer.
The main option to change the media content is not view it and let the ratings modify the media's behavior through pressure from the advertisers. If a certain demographic tunes in and is the target of enough advertisers the program matters not at all. For example, young Americans boycotting a station makes no difference to advertisers selling retirement homes. Of course direct pressure on the advertiser will also have an effect.
MousePlayingDaffodil
(748 posts)That's perfectly put, to my mind. That viewers are the "product" and that the advertisers are the true "customers" of all for-profit television and radio captures it very well.
As to this, Rupert Murdoch originally created Fox News to exploit what he (correctly) perceived to be a "neglected" niche in "news" broadcasting. There was nothing fundamentally "conservative" in his thinking here.
Murdoch would have happily televised late-term abortions if he thought he could make money off of it.
Yonnie3
(17,491 posts)angrychair
(8,733 posts)Just has to sustain the status quo.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)better for ratings and dollars than a continuous political pissing contest.
As much as I like some of the people over at MSNBC, a lot of what is in the press every day about trump's character and his very questionable and illegal business dealings was knowable and actionable BEFORE the election but the press played both sides and kissed trump's ass all through the election.
As always, I refer to a full screen shot of an empty podium that trump would eventually stand at for almost 30 minutes without cutting away. An empty podium that trump eventually stood at got almost as much coverage that day than either Clinton or Sanders.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)They paved the way to the white house for him all along by normalizing his poo throwing apelike antics and looking the other way at his Russian connections.
And breathless stories of doom about Hillary's emails....
leftstreet
(36,116 posts)Locrian
(4,522 posts)The mainstream media RAKES in cash if they keep him in the news cycle.
Not to mention they benefit from the ton of GOP initiatives - Dod Frank repeal, etc.
Don't forget it's a BIGGER war than just the orange idiot. There are plenty of people perfectly willing to ride the wave of chaos/destruction and fuck us all for a few bucks.
SharonClark
(10,014 posts)shraby
(21,946 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)there is a major newspaper war on in Trump scandal coverage, like nothing ever seen before.
The only real question at this point, Why did the media fawn over trump sop much before. Probably, because they were paid huge lumps of laundered Russian mob cash under the table.
angrychair
(8,733 posts)They spoke about trump/Russia for 5-7 mins and Clinton for 5 minutes!!
She is not running for office or in office and it's not relevant to Russia hacking us and the things trump and his people did is possible collusion with Russia.