Ted Koppel: "Establishment Press" Decided That Trump Is Bad For The United States, "Out To Get Him"

Former ABC News anchor Ted Koppel said President Trump is "not mistaken" that the media is "out to get him" in a discussion with Marvin Kalb at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Koppel said 'The New York Times' is "committed" to making sure Trump is not elected and that the president the "liberal media" have become part of "the resistance."

"We are not the reservoir of objectivity that I think we were," Koppel lamented in the interview.

"We have things appearing on the front page of the New York Times right now that never would have appeared 50 years ago. Analysis, commentary on the front page," Koppel said. "I remember sitting at the breakfast table with my wife during the campaign after the Access Hollywood tape came out and the New York Times, and I will not offend any of you here by using the language but you know exactly what words were used and they were spelled out on the front page of the New York Times."

"I turned to my wife and I said the Times is absolutely committed to making sure that this guy does not get elected," he said. "So his perception that the establishment press is out to get him doesn’t mean that great journalism is not being done. It is. But the notion that most of us look upon Donald Trump as being an absolute fiasco, he’s not mistaken in that perception and he’s not mistaken when so many of the liberal media, for example, described themselves as belonging to the Resistance."

"We’re talking about organizations that I believe have, in fact, decided as organizations that Donald J. Trump is bad for the United States," Kopell said.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

Ted Koppel: "Establishment Press" Decided That Trump Is Bad For The United States, "Out To Get Him"

.


Ted Koppel nailed this and I don't think he's particularly a Trump fan either, but he is a journalist with a whole lot of integrity.

The Trump resistance isn't going to like reading the above.
Trump's been around long enough to know the difference between journalism and biased commentary so when he sees smack on the front page of the Times, he's gonna's call it what it is. Open up google news for instance on almost any given day, and take a look at the headlines coming from the establishment press. That's not journalism! It's propaganda coming from biased leftists doing their best to keep pedaling crap to hurt Trump's reelection chances.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

Ted Koppel: "Establishment Press" Decided That Trump Is Bad For The United States, "Out To Get Him"



Ted Koppel nailed this and I don't think he's particularly a Trump fan either, but he is a journalist with a whole lot of integrity.

The Trump resistance isn't going to like reading the above.
Trump's been around long enough to know the difference between journalism and biased commentary so when he sees smack on the front page of the Times, he's gonna's call it what it is. Open up google news for instance on almost any given day, and take a look at the headlines coming from the establishment press. That's not journalism! It's propaganda coming from biased leftists doing their best to keep pedaling crap to hurt Trump's reelection chances.

Click to expand...

Vidi said:

Is it propaganda though?

Does it have to be lies to be propaganda? Or is it just spin?

If I say the Saddam Hussein regime that has a different connotation than if I said the Saddam Hussein administration.

All media has spin. Every journalist had bias. But is it inaccurate?

If I say Trump said we shouldn’t cut social security while campaigning but his latest budget proposes social security cuts, is that biased?


I don’t care if something is biased. I know the colorful words that create that bias. All I care about is of the facts are accurate. I have a brain. I’ll figure the rest out for myself

Click to expand...

Carjosse said:

Because Fox News praised Obama all the time and never ever criticized him for ridiculous reasons and continues to do so with many Democrats. The right wing and Trump himself also a problem with seeing any criticism of Trump meaning that a news organization is "out to get him".

Click to expand...

Vidi said:

Is it propaganda though?

Does it have to be lies to be propaganda? Or is it just spin?

If I say the Saddam Hussein regime that has a different connotation than if I said the Saddam Hussein administration.

All media has spin. Every journalist had bias. But is it inaccurate?

If I say Trump said we shouldn’t cut social security while campaigning but his latest budget proposes social security cuts, is that biased?


I don’t care if something is biased. I know the colorful words that create that bias. All I care about is of the facts are accurate. I have a brain. I’ll figure the rest out for myself

Click to expand...

Carjosse said:

Because Fox News praised Obama all the time and never ever criticized him for ridiculous reasons and continues to do so with many Democrats. The right wing and Trump himself also a problem with seeing any criticism of Trump meaning that a news organization is "out to get him".

Click to expand...

Chomsky said:

though as long as the media is doing it's best to report accurately

Click to expand...

The New York Times investigative team admitted its has an agenda heading into their anti-Trump reporting during a written Q&A with Times reporters Rebecca Corbett and Dean Murphy published by the Times in a “series of posts explaining some of our journalistic practices.”

“The standard to be able to conclude something definitively — like, say, ‘President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes’ — is really high,” wrote Katie Van Syckle, the Times colleague leading the Q&A. “As an editor, what do you need to feel confident publishing that?”

The lengthy Times’ investigative reporting around President Trump’s father and the Trump family business conceded that the Trump family did nothing that wasn’t commonplace among families of that era. But that didn’t stop Corbett from asserting that their goal in reporting was to be “persuasive” about their preconceived investigative “thesis”–rather than following evidence wherever it leads.

“Stories in my view have to be persuasive,” Corbett said. “Persuasive meaning you can make a case for whatever your thesis is. And your thesis has to be buttressed with all manner of things. It can be documents; it can be interviews; it can be the person’s own statements. Typically it is a combination of many things. There is no one handbook on what makes an investigative story.”

Click to expand...

Chomsky said:

I think Koppel is right in general terms, though as long as the media is doing it's best to report accurately, I don't see a problem. In Koppel's example, how could the media not cover that story (Access Hollywood)?

A lot of citizens are alarmed by Trump, my self included. And with the media generally being educated and aware, I don't see it unusually that they aren't alarmed as well.

I always liked Ted Koppel, BTW ...

Click to expand...

A former executive editor of the New York Times says the paper’s news pages, the home of its straight-news coverage, have become “unmistakably anti-Trump.”

Jill Abramson, the veteran journalist who led the newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says the Times has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility.

In a soon-to-be published book, “Merchants of Truth,” that casts a skeptical eye on the news business, Abramson defends the Times in some ways but offers some harsh words for her successor, Dean Baquet. And Abramson, who was the paper’s only female executive editor until her firing, invoked Steve Bannon’s slam that in the Trump era the mainstream media have become the “opposition party.”
me is true of the Washington Post. “Some headlines contained raw opinion, as did some of the stories that were labeled as news analysis.”
“Though Baquet said publicly he didn’t want the Times to be the opposition party, his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump,” Abramson writes, adding that she believes the same is true of the Washington Post.

What’s more, she says, citing legendary 20th century publisher Adolph Ochs, “the more anti-Trump the Times was perceived to be, the more it was mistrusted for being biased. Ochs’s vow to cover the news without fear or favor sounded like an impossible promise in such a polarized environment.”

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

The Trump resistance isn't going to like reading the above.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

Koppel is on the up and up. He sees what many of us see on a daily basis.
Maybe this will convince you.
Former NYT Editor Jill Abramson: Media is Anti-Trump

Click to expand...

When the closing gavels came down on the 2016 political conventions, the news cycle did not ease into the usual midsummer lull but instead locked directly into a state of high alarm, with Donald J. Trump at its center. In the days following Trump’s nomination, there came reports of senior Republican officials considering ways to replace him on the ballot (ABC News), of “suicidal” despair inside the Trump campaign (CNBC), and of a growing list of Republican leaders who planned to publicly support Hillary Clinton (Time). Fox News reported that friends of Trump’s were planning to stage an intervention, involving his family, in hopes of saving his candidacy.

But amid those passing controversies was one story that Trump himself remembers clearly still.

“Yep, very famous story,” he remarked to me in a recent interview. “It was a very important story...” Trump was referring to a front-page New York Times article published on August 8, 2016, under the headline "The Challenge Trump Poses to Objectivity." The opening paragraph posed a provocative 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?”

The author of the piece was Jim Rutenberg, an important byline at the Times. He writes a media column for the paper, a feature deeply informed by Rutenberg’s experience covering politics and as an investigative reporter. Rutenberg has a keen sense of current thinking in the media hive, and when he wrote that “everyone” was asking the questions he raised in his Trump “demagogue” column, it carried the weight of mainstream newsroom consensus. Reporters who considered Trump “potentially dangerous,” Rutenberg wrote, would inevitably move closer “to being oppositional” to him in their reporting—“by normal standards, untenable.” Normal standards, the column made clear, no longer applied.

Trump said that was an important article because “they basically admitted that they were frauds."

“They admitted in that story that they didn’t care about journalism anymore,” he continued, “that they were just going to write badly. That was an amazing admission.”

It’s an essential Trumpian assertion—wildly hyperbolic, but containing what much of Red America would consider a sort of rough truth.

Click to expand...

Mycroft said:

I think what Koppel is getting at is more like this stuff: Mediaite.com | News & Opinion | Media: TV, Print, Online, Jobs, Ranking

Click to expand...

Harshaw said:

Given the many, many botched stories and retractions, I can't say it is.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

It's propaganda coming from biased leftists doing their best to keep pedaling crap to hurt Trump's reelection chances.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

Koppel is on the up and up. He sees what many of us see on a daily basis.
Maybe this will convince you.
Former NYT Editor Jill Abramson: Media is Anti-Trump

Click to expand...

Vidi said:

I’m more concerned about those that don’t retract.

Click to expand...

Carjosse said:

Because Fox News praised Obama all the time and never ever criticized him for ridiculous reasons and continues to do so with many Democrats. The right wing and Trump himself also a problem with seeing any criticism of Trump meaning that a news organization is "out to get him".

Click to expand...

TheParser said:

The people at the New York Times should be ashamed of themselves for what they have done to Mr. Ochs's newspaper.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

He is bad for the U.S.

Go make another Fox News if you don't like it, instead of crying about the fact that people and entities are allowed to engage in political speech.

Click to expand...

trixare4kids said:

IOW, ethical journalism standards took a back seat when Trump was elected.

Click to expand...