Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

malaise

(296,008 posts)
Tue Nov 22, 2016, 11:24 AM Nov 2016

Trump v the media: did his tactics mortally wound the fourth estate? [View all]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/22/election-2016-donald-trump-media-coverage
<snip>
The TV channels feasted on tweeted Trumpisms with an alacrity that many observers found disturbing. According to a study by mediaQuant, Trump benefited from the equivalent of $5.2bn worth of free airtime from earned media, a quantity that the firm’s analysts said was “almost surreal in sheer magnitude”. In return, cable channels enjoyed a massive ratings spike.

TV was convulsed by other controversies, notably CNN’s decision to employ Trump’s former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski while he was still receiving “severance payments” from his old boss, and the embarrassment (also falling to CNN) of Democratic strategist Donna Brazile leaking questions from a town hall event in advance to the Clinton campaign. More red faces erupted at NBC when its Access Hollywood tape of Trump’s lewd comments about women was leaked to the Washington Post after the network appeared to dither over broadcasting it.

But these difficulties, humiliating at times though they were, pale in comparison with the overarching charge that TV – and to a lesser degree the press – was indiscriminate for far too long in its handling of Trump, engaging with him more like the Apprentice reality TV star that he was than the US president that he wanted to become. “During the primaries, cable news – in particular CNN and Fox, and to some extent MSNBC – gave Trump unhealthily generous, inflated coverage. That helped make him,” says Margaret Sullivan, media columnist of the Washington Post.

It takes someone with the on-the-ground experience of John Weaver, chief strategist to Trump’s rival John Kasich during the Republican primaries, to spell out the full impact of this media binge on the election. He believes it actively distorted the process, and even now, six months after Kasich dropped out of the race, you can still hear the fury in Weaver’s voice.
Advertisement

“I hope there’s some deep introspection at the networks and cable channels over the billions of dollars of free coverage they gave to Donald Trump, often without holding him accountable for his bizarre claims. He is judged by such a low standard by many of the news media, it’s troubling to me.”

--------------------
Long but worth the read
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump v the media: did hi...