Why the Mainstream Media Really Sucks

[Stephen Maturin]

It's about goddamn time we got the fact-checking category, "True, but distasteful and therefore justifiably amenable to being massaged into untruth."

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

"Stockholm syndrome" is a pathology in which hostages begin to identify with and form emotional bonds with their captors. https://t.co/qziFYePSBI

— Patrick Nonwhite (@NonWhiteHat) July 20, 2019

[erimir]

On substance, Democrats got what they wanted: that Mueller didn't charge Pres. Trump because of the OLC guidance, that he could be indicted after he leaves office, among other things. But on optics, this was a disaster. #MuellerHearings

— Chuck Todd (@chucktodd) July 24, 2019

Obviously, Chuck Todd has nothing to do with the optics. When he says the substance was good but the optics were bad, that's just stating facts independent of media reportage. It's not like he could simply emphasize that the substance was good (which would in turn, create "good optics").

[Crumb]

I hate it when member's of the media act like they have no power over politics while they are in the act exercising that power. Often I hear them say something like "Xyz seems important, but everyone is talking about abc instead. And now for the next ten minutes we will discuss abc."

[erimir]

Just replace "optics" with "media coverage from people like me" to see how things read differently.

Originally Posted by corrected Chuck Todd

On substance, Democrats got what they wanted: that Mueller didn't charge Pres. Trump because of the OLC guidance, that he could be indicted after he leaves office, among other things. But with media coverage from people like me, this was a disaster. #MuellerHearings

[erimir]

Fans of false equivalency everywhere will be savoring this sentence: "The Republicans seemed not at all concerned by any of the president’s actions, and the Democrats were not at all concerned by any of the prosecutor’s actions." /2

— Lawrence Glickman (@LarryGlickman) July 25, 2019

But of course the NYT runs anti-Trump opinion pieces in the opinion section, so their Chief White House Correspondent writing bullshit like this as "news analysis" is of no consequence.

[davidm]

For those who may not be able to access the full Times article, which is behind a firewall, you can find it here.

Here is a quote from the article:

“Much as I hate to say it, this morning’s hearing was a disaster,” Laurence Tribe, the Harvard law professor who has argued that the House should pursue impeachment, wrote on Twitter. “Far from breathing life into his damning report, the tired Robert Mueller sucked the life out of it. The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced.”

Did Peter Baker make up this quote? Or did he just report the facts?

Yes, Peter Baker, a great journalist, just reported the facts.

Erimir, of course, wants the NY Times to be a propaganda outlet for views that he favors. In this, he is no different from his secret hero, Donald Trump, and the “news” outlet that he secretly lionizes, the Fox News Propaganda Channel.

Once again, those who are attacking the Times are just shooting the messenger. The Times did not let you down. Robert Mueller did. Mueller blew it. The Times has dutifully reported that he blew it. So sorry.

I see this place is just as shitty as it ever has been over the last couple of years, which is why, with rare occasions like this, I don’t participate here anymore.

Erimir, I hope you enjoy lying like your secret hero Trump. You and Trump are two peas in a pitiful pod.

Oh, look! Here is the last paragraph of Baker’s article, from which Erimir and the T*****r airhead dishonestly cherry-picked.

Trump has claimed that Mueller’s report represented “complete and total exoneration,” which the special counsel made clear again Wednesday was not true. So Republicans spent much of the day trying to establish that Mueller actually did not have the power to exonerate, despite the president’s own false claims that he had done just that.

I bolded “false claims” for you, erimir, you lying little asshole. You’re welcome!

[davidm]

But of course the NYT runs anti-Trump opinion pieces in the opinion section, so their Chief White House Correspondent writing bullshit like this as "news analysis" is of no consequence.

I should also reiterate that the Times has done MUCH MORE than run "anti-Trump opinion pieces in the opinion section," but then erimir is a demonstrated, despicable liar. A couple of years ago, I posted dozens of links to NY Times news articles and in-depth investigative reports that have torn Trump to shreds. These are, again, news articles and investigative reports, and not just op-ed pieces. Do you understand, erimir? Or are you, by now, so addicted to lying that you cannot admit that you are wrong?

Anyone can search my posts and find the post I refer to above. I'm not going to do your work for you, particularly because the few people who continue to post here seem to be credulous gulls.

[Sock Puppet]

Go fuck your hat.

[Ari]

When I search for prof Tribe I get Fox news being overly excited about this quote as well.

[erimir]

davidm: *complains that consists of too much posting of embedded tweets*

also davidm: Peter Baker, A GREAT JOURNALIST, is simply REPORTING THE FACTS when he quotes Lawrence Tribe's tweeted opinions!

Of course, this has nothing to do with the false equivalency that was pointed out. What the fuck does Lawrence Tribe's opinion have to do with what was being criticized?

I'm also unaware of how doing in-depth investigations of some things makes false equivalencies in other reportage acceptable and not worthy of criticism.

[Ari]

Two white adult (19) men confessed to stabbing an Italian police officer to death after a possible drug deal gone bad. They are from the bay area, the news keeps referring to these confessed murders as, “Students” “High school grads” “Local teens” and “accused of murder” and despite plenty of arresting photos available, keep using their high school yearbook photos.

I am able to pick out AP articles vs local articles on the headlines alone.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

Very much along those lines, Trump 2020 campaign transcription campaign has kicked off in earnest. Such a journalism.

I hope the internet is wrong that tomorrow's front page, above-the-fold headline will read "TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM"

[Qingdai]

The New York Times has never been a relevent source of media for the west coast. I understand the population is in the east, but it often reads very skewed and flat out here.

[specious_reasons]

Everyone knows Trump is a racist, so why can't the media say it? | Salon.com

So that's one way Trump is unifying the country: Everyone appears to be on the same page when it comes to believing there's no way Trump means it when says racism is bad, m'kay? The actual disagreement is not whether Trump is a racist but whether it's a bad thing that the president is a racist, with many of his cheerleaders obviously landing on the terrifying side of "it's not."

And yet journalists and editors keep falling for it, time and again, running headlines or directly quoting Trump saying nice, conciliatory things without indicating to audiences that there is absolutely no way Trump means it. It's tempting to get paranoid about this, imagining that the reason is journalists are secretly in the tank for Trump and are treating his gaslighting as if it were good faith in order to help him.

The likelier story, in most cases, is that the traditions of journalism leave media sources ill-equipped to deal with Trump.

[Stephen Maturin]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

I hope the internet is wrong that tomorrow's front page, above-the-fold headline will read "TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM"

According to this dipshit, a former Clinton pollster, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez used her near-dictatorial authority to violate the NY Times' First Amendment rights by making the Times change the headline.

As seen somewhere on the internet yesterday, "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism" is on par with "O.J. Simpson Vows to Find the Real Killers." O.J. did in fact say that, but the vow was a steaming, stinking, extraordinarily large pile of shit.

[SR71]

It was obvious that tRump's sudden channeling of MLK needed to be juxtaposed with an obvious counterweight that shows up his recent love for unity for the sham it is. For whatever reason, the media just could not seem to muster the effort. They could have gone with this irrefutably true public display of condoning ethnic violence, for example.

Trump Is Getting Worse - The Atlantic

Late in his disorderly presentation, as he discussed the work of Border Patrol officers, he raised, and then dismissed, the idea of allowing them to use violence against migrants.

“And don’t forget—we don’t let them and we can’t let them use weapons,” he said. “We can’t. Other countries do. We can’t. I would never do that. But how do you stop these people? You can’t. There’s—”

It was then that he was interrupted by a woman in the crowd. “Shoot them!” she yelled.
The president found this funny, as did his audience. “That’s only in the Panhandle you can get away with that stuff.” He stopped for a moment to take in the crowd’s roaring approval. “Only in the Panhandle!” he repeated.

There's the real Mr. Can We All Just Get Along.

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Late in his disorderly presentation, as he discussed the work of Border Patrol officers, he raised, and then dismissed, the idea of allowing them to use violence against migrants.

“And don’t forget—we don’t let them and we can’t let them use weapons,” he said. “We can’t. Other countries do. We can’t. I would never do that. But how do you stop these people? You can’t. There’s—”

It was then that he was interrupted by a woman in the crowd. “Shoot them!” she yelled.
The president found this funny, as did his audience. “That’s only in the Panhandle you can get away with that stuff.” He stopped for a moment to take in the crowd’s roaring approval. “Only in the Panhandle!” he repeated.

Originally Posted by Joseph Stalin

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.

Weirder and weirder.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by Stephen Maturin

According to this dipshit, a former Clinton pollster, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez used her near-dictatorial authority to violate the NY Times' First Amendment rights by making the Times change the headline.

As seen somewhere on the internet yesterday, "Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism" is on par with "O.J. Simpson Vows to Find the Real Killers." O.J. did in fact say that, but the vow was a steaming, stinking, extraordinarily large pile of shit.

https://www.businessinsider.com/new-...eadline-2019-8

Ocasio-Cortez retweeted an image of the front page with the comment: "Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by - and often relies upon - the cowardice of mainstream institutions."

Jack booted twitter posterer! This is a clear violation of the Times' 1st Amendment right to not be criticized for what it writes.

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Kamilah Hauptmann

Weirder and weirder.

I feel compelled to note that there’s a reasonable chance that Stalin never actually said this. The first source attributing the quote to Stalin appears to be a 2001 book of quotations by the former U.S. Senator Robert Torricelli, who offers no source for the attribution. There appears to be no contemporary historical reference indicating that Stalin said this. I’m not sure if Torricelli made the quote up himself or if it had already existed and he simply misattributed it.

For whatever reason, Stalin seems to be a magnet for apocryphal quotes (though perhaps not to the same extent as Churchill). Others include:

• “The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of millions is a statistic,” apparently from Französischer Witz (1925) by Kurt Tucholsky, except it was a hundred thousand in Tucholsky’s version;
  
  
• “You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs,” properly attributed to François de Charette, dated no later than 1742;
  
  
• “We will hang the capitalists with the rope that they sell us,” which is probably spurious, though Lenin may have made similar remarks on how capitalists addicted to profits would still sell to socialist nations;
  
  
• “Four walls are three too many for a prison – you only need one for an execution,” which was apparently the Spanish military leader Juan Domingo de Monteverde; and
  
  
• “Death solves all problems: no man, no problem,” which is actually from the novel Children of the Arbat (1987) by Anatoly Rybakov, though this one is more understandable than the others, since it’s historical fiction and Stalin says the quote in the novel.

What I make of this is that, while Apocryphal Stalin was still a monstrous dictator, he was quite a bit wittier than the real one. Most of the real Stalin’s quotes aren’t anywhere near this pithy.

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

Welp, dropping that one from my library of dictator quotes.

[But]

Sydney Ember's Secret Sources | FAIR

New York Times reporter Sydney Ember has a problem with Bernie Sanders—which may be why the paper has her cover him.

Ember is supposed to write reported articles, not op-eds, but she consistently paints a negative picture of Sanders’ temperament, history, policies and/or political prospects in the over two dozen pieces she’s done on him. This makes sense, given the New York Times’ documented anti-Sanders bias, which can be found among both editors and reporters alike.

Ember’s articles on Sanders (sometimes co-written with other Times reporters) often quote as neutral authorities individuals who are on the other side of a wide ideological divide, with longstanding antipathies to Sanders’ left socioeconomic perspective. Moreover, many of these “experts” are corporate lobbyists, whose work in a particular area is not guided by academic, journalistic or other professional standards, but by the economic and political interests of their clients. Ember spins the identity of her authorities, who are themselves professional spinners.

[erimir]

You better watch out. It sounds like you want the New York Times to become propagandists for your favored candidate. This makes you no different from your secret hero, Donald Trump.

Did Sydney Ember make up those quotes by political opponents of Sanders? Or did she just report the facts?

And I suppose you'd have the NYT just not report on Sanders's dalliances with anti-American countries and organizations like the Soviet Union and Sandinistas! Those things are news! And if the Republicans hold hearings on them next October, or Jane Sanders dealings with Burlington College, which were the subject of an FBI investigation, the NYT will be justified in devoting even more coverage to them! In fact, justification doesn't even enter into it, that would be like discussing whether the wheels go on top or underneath a car like it's under the mechanic's discretion.

The fact is that if Bernie Sanders isn't doing well, it's because Bernie Sanders is a shitty candidate. The NYT didn't let you down, Bernie Sanders did.

And how can the NYT be biased against Sanders if they also published positive articles like this one or this one, calling his immigration plan the best policy?

One can only conclude that you are a despicable liar.

[Kamilah Hauptmann]

This goes about as well as can be imagined:

Was your flight out of Hong Kong canceled? We want to hear from the thousands affected by demonstrations and flight disruptions at Hong Kong International Airport. https://t.co/vuZ9BWgBlI

— New York Times World (@nytimesworld) August 13, 2019

[Ari]

Mainstream media reminds me so much of Kitchen Nightmares, where a failing kitchen decides to make all the wrong decisions and can’t figure out why they are still failing. The establishment starts to lose money, so in an effort to do the same with less, corners get cut. Ultimately though most fail for the same reason, they’ve started treated their customers as cash units to be flipped upside down and shaken before sent on their way, and not people they are providing a service for. In this way every cut corner is justified through numbers, obviously if you want to make more money you need to spend less and charge more, how simple is that! See buying meat frozen in bulk and then microwaving it saves money and allows for more units to be served, bringing in more money, soon you will be rich! ...what do you mean the restaurant’s empty?

Vulture capitalists pick over the dead remains of Gawker Media after Univision saddles them with debt. Certain in their expertise the new owners have a plan, to cut costs and increase revenue. Im sure it will work this time.

The adults in the room: Deadspin

A metastasizing swath of media is controlled by private-equity vultures and capricious billionaires and other people who genuinely believe that they are rich because they are smart and that they are smart because they are rich, and that anyone less rich is by definition less smart. They know what they know, and they don’t need to know anything else.

This is good. Where are all the adults indeed.
The more I look the more obvious it is there were never many real adults in the world to begin with, the few adults remaining are working on protecting themselves from Lord of Flies vulture capitalism that’s currently running around smashing all our nice things.