The Media's Hatred of Trump Is Hurting the Country

Michael Goodwin, New York Post:

This month marks the two-year anniversary of one of the most important articles ever written on journalism. On Aug. 7, 2016, after Donald Trump formally secured the Republican nomination and the general election was underway, New York Times media columnist James Rutenberg began with a question:

“If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?”

Click to expand...

The normal standards of the Times were that no reporter so biased should cover a candidate. But the New York Times decided to change the standard because of Trump. They all became ferociously one sided in their opposition to him as a candidate.

When Trump won, the Times issued a brief series of mea culpas about not correctly predicting the results of the election and then went right on with their biased coverage of Trump, becoming part of the resistance.

Since the Times is a bellweather, they provided an excuse for the rest of the media to follow suit. The result has been highly distorted, false coverage overall.

For example, nothing positive about Trump can ever be reported. Improvement in the economy resulting from his policies is not reported. Or if it is, the media tries to give credit to Obama. It's important to the welfare of the whole nation that the people get accurate information about the results of government policies, but this has become secondary to the mainstream media's goal of deposing Trump.

People are not fooled. When they learn how they are being lied to they become angry.

Once upon a time people could trust the New York Times to provide all of the relevant facts in a story even if they gave it a liberal bias. No more. Now days their reporting of what is going on in the White House is most likely completely false, made up lies laundered through anonymous third parties. And, again, any story that makes Trump look good never makes it into print.

And this doesn't just affect people on the right. Liberals, too, realize that they can't trust what the news media is saying after, for example, having been disappointed so many times over reporting about the next big thing that was going to take Trump down.

When reporting what the president says and does makes him look bad, we have a bad president. No, it is not the media's job to fellate Trump and paint him in the best light, it is to report on his actions and statements critically to the American people, and in that, they've done an excellent job.

RabidAlpaca said:

When reporting what the president says and does makes him look bad, we have a bad president. No, it is not the media's job to fellate Trump and paint him in the best light, it is to report on his actions and statements critically to the American people, and in that, they've done an excellent job.

Click to expand...

The bold part is where you went wrong. Journalism/News is supposed to be about reporting ALL the facts. Not spin. Not critiques. Just the facts and nothing but the facts. And letting The People decide on their own what to think. Because they no longer do this it makes your first sentence suspect.

Kal'Stang said:

The bold part is where you went wrong. Journalism/News is supposed to be about reporting ALL the facts. Not spin. Not critiques. Just the facts and nothing but the facts. And letting The People decide on their own what to think. Because they no longer do this it makes your first sentence suspect.

Click to expand...

No, it is to examine critically the facts of the situation and dig deeper. If journalists just took Trump's word on everything and never fact checked it, they wouldn't be doing their jobs. Even still, if a news agency simply quotes Trump or reports factually on what he does, they will still be attacked by Trump and his supporters as fake news. Any news that is not 100% positive is considered the enemy, that is not how a free press works.

RabidAlpaca said:

No, it is to examine critically the facts of the situation and dig deeper. If journalists just took Trump's word on everything and never fact checked it, they wouldn't be doing their jobs. Even still, if a news agency simply quotes Trump or reports factually on what he does, they will still be attacked by Trump and his supporters as fake news. Any news that is not 100% positive is considered the enemy, that is not how a free press works.

Click to expand...

No. They can report the facts, even the facts that dispute what is said by someone. But it should be left up to the read/listener/watcher to decide. Can you point to me a single instance of any of the major big 5 news media that has not given some sort of opinion in any of their articles?

And your last sentence is obviously false as even Fox has at times been critical of Trump and yet Trump apparently listens to them and praises them all the time.

Kal'Stang said:

The bold part is where you went wrong. Journalism/News is supposed to be about reporting ALL the facts. Not spin. Not critiques. Just the facts and nothing but the facts. And letting The People decide on their own what to think. Because they no longer do this it makes your first sentence suspect.

Click to expand...

When Journalism/News reports only 1/2 the facts, i.e. only what puts Trump in a bad light and never anything else, that's reporting 1/2 truths.

RabidAlpaca said:

When reporting what the president says and does makes him look bad, we have a bad president. No, it is not the media's job to fellate Trump and paint him in the best light, it is to report on his actions and statements critically to the American people, and in that, they've done an excellent job.

Click to expand...

50 years of GOP Hatred is Enough. GOP Hatred feeding off of the Southern Strategy is Enough. Nixon’s Treason for Interfering in Paris Peace Talks costing the USA 22,000 more Dead Soldiers is Enough.

Specifically Dividing this Nation into Left and Right, the GOP’s stated Goal by Pat Buchanan, Limbaugh and sadly Reagan is Enough. Stealing Elections since 2000 is Enough.

GOPutins Colluding with Russian Intrusions into our Electoral Infrastructure since the 2014 Elections, continuing through the bastardized 2016 Elections, and now the 2018 Elections is more than enough, except for GOP Traitors.

eohrnberger said:

When Journalism/News reports only 1/2 the facts, i.e. only what puts Trump in a bad light and never anything else, that's reporting 1/2 truths.

Click to expand...

Alternative Lies from GOPutins

Kal'Stang said:

No. They can report the facts, even the facts that dispute what is said by someone. But it should be left up to the read/listener/watcher to decide. Can you point to me a single instance of any of the major big 5 news media that has not given some sort of opinion in any of their articles?

And your last sentence is obviously false as even Fox has at times been critical of Trump and yet Trump apparently listens to them and praises them all the time.

Click to expand...

Newspapers used to have on op ed page for ops and eds, and the rest of the paper was by and large a reporting of the news. That's no longer the case. Media now believes they have a mission. Currently that mission for many is to attempt to right the past wrong of Hillary losing.

I no longer watch or read media, and get my news mostly from forums and other similar sources.

RabidAlpaca said:

No, it is to examine critically the facts of the situation and dig deeper. If journalists just took Trump's word on everything and never fact checked it, they wouldn't be doing their jobs. Even still, if a news agency simply quotes Trump or reports factually on what he does, they will still be attacked by Trump and his supporters as fake news. Any news that is not 100% positive is considered the enemy, that is not how a free press works.

Click to expand...

I think that really is the most important thing. Bias will always exist when it comes to news coverage. The real problem is that often times any negative news about Trump is slammed as "fake news".

eohrnberger said:

When Journalism/News reports only 1/2 the facts, i.e. only what puts Trump in a bad light and never anything else, that's reporting 1/2 truths.

Click to expand...

What Trump-redeeming facts aren’t being reported?

LowDown said:

The normal standards of the Times were that no reporter so biased should cover a candidate. But the New York Times decided to change the standard because of Trump. They all became ferociously one sided in their opposition to him as a candidate.

When Trump won, the Times issued a brief series of mea culpas about not correctly predicting the results of the election and then went right on with their biased coverage of Trump, becoming part of the resistance.

Since the Times is a bellweather, they provided an excuse for the rest of the media to follow suit. The result has been highly distorted, false coverage overall.

For example, nothing positive about Trump can ever be reported. Improvement in the economy resulting from his policies is not reported. Or if it is, the media tries to give credit to Obama. It's important to the welfare of the whole nation that the people get accurate information about the results of government policies, but this has become secondary to the mainstream media's goal of deposing Trump.

People are not fooled. When they learn how they are being lied to they become angry.

Once upon a time people could trust the New York Times to provide all of the relevant facts in a story even if they gave it a liberal bias. No more. Now days their reporting of what is going on in the White House is most likely completely false, made up lies laundered through anonymous third parties. And, again, any story that makes Trump look good never makes it into print.

And this doesn't just affect people on the right. Liberals, too, realize that they can't trust what the news media is saying after, for example, having been disappointed so many times over reporting about the next big thing that was going to take Trump down.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you posted this, and most especially the bolded part above, because this explains much of what has happened since the 2016 election.

I was sitting on the fence for most of the campaign period. By that I mean that while I knew I didn't want to vote for Hillary, it was a toss-up whether I'd support Bernie Sanders, or whichever one of the Republican's won the nomination.

I initially viewed Trump as a sort of side-show, believing he threw his hat in the ring as a public relations ploy trying to improve his name recognition for business reasons.

However, when I started seeing all these allegations of racism, xenophobia, making fun of the handicapped, etc., referring to statements made during his campaign rallies I became curious because it did not match the image I had of Trump from my time as a New York City resident.

So I went and reviewed the source material and found that those allegations were false and misleading, based on misrepresentation of what he actually said. Then I saw all the left-wing violence against people who were trying to attend his rallies, often reported positively by the press as righteous responses to a "very bad" person.

It was at that point I became "angry" because it was clear we were being lied to by the media. That's when I decided to support his election and voted for him in 2016.

But I would like to point out the other side, something people who strongly oppose the Administration keep misunderstanding when I say their fanatical efforts to attack Trump are based on his election victory.

It is not that they are upset so much that Hillary lost, it is the fact they were assured night and day month after month by the MSM that there was no way in hell he could win...right up through election night. And then he won!

The emotional and psychic shock of this victory, despite all assurances it could never happen, is what has turned the opposition into the fanatics we see today. It can be laid almost entirely at the feet of the misleading media coverage, both prior to and then the consistently after the election.

The media has hyped that the election was stolen by foreign influences, particularly Russia, and that Trump must have colluded in this theft. That is the life-raft of those who cannot understand how their worldview could be turned upside down by this impossible victory. The media has continued to evolve in it's attacks, pushing a narrative of corruption, serial lying, sexual misconduct, obstruction, you name it they throw it including the kitchen sink. Non-stop, 24/7.

Small wonder people seem to have lost all objectivity as anti-Trump and pro-Trump dig in to fight each other.

LowDown said:

Michael Goodwin, New York Post:



The normal standards of the Times were that no reporter so biased should cover a candidate. But the New York Times decided to change the standard because of Trump. They all became ferociously one sided in their opposition to him as a candidate.

When Trump won, the Times issued a brief series of mea culpas about not correctly predicting the results of the election and then went right on with their biased coverage of Trump, becoming part of the resistance.

Since the Times is a bellweather, they provided an excuse for the rest of the media to follow suit. The result has been highly distorted, false coverage overall.

For example, nothing positive about Trump can ever be reported. Improvement in the economy resulting from his policies is not reported. Or if it is, the media tries to give credit to Obama. It's important to the welfare of the whole nation that the people get accurate information about the results of government policies, but this has become secondary to the mainstream media's goal of deposing Trump.

People are not fooled. When they learn how they are being lied to they become angry.

Once upon a time people could trust the New York Times to provide all of the relevant facts in a story even if they gave it a liberal bias. No more. Now days their reporting of what is going on in the White House is most likely completely false, made up lies laundered through anonymous third parties. And, again, any story that makes Trump look good never makes it into print.

And this doesn't just affect people on the right. Liberals, too, realize that they can't trust what the news media is saying after, for example, having been disappointed so many times over reporting about the next big thing that was going to take Trump down.

Click to expand...

Trump is a threat to the democrat party and their un-American universalism one world socialistic policies and agenda. That drives them on the insane treasonous course to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States and its Constitutional government.

marke said:

Trump is a threat to the democrat party and their un-American universalism one world socialistic policies and agenda. That drives them on the insane treasonous course to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States and its Constitutional government.

Click to expand...

:roll:

Trump should stop lying and being an asshole if he wants better coverage. of course the media is going to point it out when he does that.

Helix said:

Trump should stop lying and being an asshole if he wants better coverage. of course the media is going to point it out when he does that.

Click to expand...

What an ignorant thing to say. The media despises Trump, no matter what he says or does.

LowDown said:

Michael Goodwin, New York Post:



The normal standards of the Times were that no reporter so biased should cover a candidate. But the New York Times decided to change the standard because of Trump. They all became ferociously one sided in their opposition to him as a candidate.

When Trump won, the Times issued a brief series of mea culpas about not correctly predicting the results of the election and then went right on with their biased coverage of Trump, becoming part of the resistance.

Since the Times is a bellweather, they provided an excuse for the rest of the media to follow suit. The result has been highly distorted, false coverage overall.

For example, nothing positive about Trump can ever be reported. Improvement in the economy resulting from his policies is not reported. Or if it is, the media tries to give credit to Obama. It's important to the welfare of the whole nation that the people get accurate information about the results of government policies, but this has become secondary to the mainstream media's goal of deposing Trump.

People are not fooled. When they learn how they are being lied to they become angry.

Once upon a time people could trust the New York Times to provide all of the relevant facts in a story even if they gave it a liberal bias. No more. Now days their reporting of what is going on in the White House is most likely completely false, made up lies laundered through anonymous third parties. And, again, any story that makes Trump look good never makes it into print.

And this doesn't just affect people on the right. Liberals, too, realize that they can't trust what the news media is saying after, for example, having been disappointed so many times over reporting about the next big thing that was going to take Trump down.

Click to expand...

Speaking of being lied to, why don't you address trumps never ending, daily lies?

Barnacle said:

What an ignorant thing to say. The media despises Trump, no matter what he says or does.

Click to expand...

like i said, he should stop lying and acting like a moron. i doubt that he can, though, as he is a lying moron.

LowDown said:

The ... down.

Click to expand...

fwiw, most of the country doesn't like Trump.
This is what that looks like.

Trump still has the largest disapproval rating ever.

So, if there's some group of Americans who don't care for Trump, they may be a representative group of Americans as most Americans don't like Trump.

If there're a group of American who do like Trump, that group could be the anomaly.


https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

Oh FFS! These efforts to make Trump a victim are becoming absurd, he was candid about wanting these disputes with the media.

Captain Adverse said:

It is not that they are upset so much that Hillary lost, it is the fact they were assured night and day month after month by the MSM that there was no way in hell he could win...right up through election night. And then he won!

The emotional and psychic shock of this victory, despite all assurances it could never happen, is what has turned the opposition into the fanatics we see today. It can be laid almost entirely at the feet of the misleading media coverage, both prior to and then the consistently after the election.

Click to expand...

This speaks more to an ignorance of how chances work.

Saying something has only a 1 in 1000 chance can still be correct even if that 1 chance actually happens.

So, if talking heads were saying that there's little chance of a Trump presidency, it's not at all the same as saying that there's no chance of a Trump presidency.

It's hard for me to blame the folks who stating odds for the mis-interpretations of the folks who're hearing the odds.

LowDown said:

Michael Goodwin, New York Post:



The normal standards of the Times were that no reporter so biased should cover a candidate. But the New York Times decided to change the standard because of Trump. They all became ferociously one sided in their opposition to him as a candidate.

When Trump won, the Times issued a brief series of mea culpas about not correctly predicting the results of the election and then went right on with their biased coverage of Trump, becoming part of the resistance.

Since the Times is a bellweather, they provided an excuse for the rest of the media to follow suit. The result has been highly distorted, false coverage overall.

For example, nothing positive about Trump can ever be reported. Improvement in the economy resulting from his policies is not reported. Or if it is, the media tries to give credit to Obama. It's important to the welfare of the whole nation that the people get accurate information about the results of government policies, but this has become secondary to the mainstream media's goal of deposing Trump.

People are not fooled. When they learn how they are being lied to they become angry.

Once upon a time people could trust the New York Times to provide all of the relevant facts in a story even if they gave it a liberal bias. No more. Now days their reporting of what is going on in the White House is most likely completely false, made up lies laundered through anonymous third parties. And, again, any story that makes Trump look good never makes it into print.

And this doesn't just affect people on the right. Liberals, too, realize that they can't trust what the news media is saying after, for example, having been disappointed so many times over reporting about the next big thing that was going to take Trump down.

Click to expand...

I'm concerned as to what China will do if Trump is defeated. I suspect they will read this as accepting the Chinese way, I presume, and bore more deeply into south America and our other allies since it seems that America has rejected "Americanism". But they will get a president they can out maneuver, that's for sure.

marke said:

Trump is a threat to the democrat party and their un-American universalism one world socialistic policies and agenda. That drives them on the insane treasonous course to overthrow the duly elected President of the United States and its Constitutional government.

Click to expand...

The facts seem to be at odds with your assessment in re the danger posed by Trumpco to the Democrats.
I mean at least if you're making the case that Trumpco is a significant threat.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/


No need to let the facts shake your faith though.
Soldier on.

Barnacle said:

What an ignorant thing to say. The media despises Trump, no matter what he says or does.

Click to expand...

Do you believe that these two people who wrote these two different opinion columns are the ones who control the opinions of all members of The Media™

Do you fault the WaPo for printing differing opinions on their opinion page?
Do you believe that the WaPo should only print one set of opinions on their pages?

Is it possible that you despise The Media™ no matter what they say or do?

Kal'Stang said:

No. They can report the facts, even the facts that dispute what is said by someone. But it should be left up to the read/listener/watcher to decide. Can you point to me a single instance of any of the major big 5 news media that has not given some sort of opinion in any of their articles? And your last sentence is obviously false as even Fox has at times been critical of Trump and yet Trump apparently listens to them and praises them all the time.

Click to expand...

Actually the burden of proof is on you to show repeated opinion inserted into all the articles you claim show bias.

The media hasn't called Trump an enemy of the people/ or as some want to claim simply said is acting like one... :roll: - in the news articles/reports.

You are Trump accurate about Fox, closer to the truth is Trump watches the OPINION segments like Hannity.

Trump isn't interested in facts but rather propaganda to distort his record and feed his base- are ya full yet??? eace