• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

At least 100 newspapers sign up to publish editorials targeting Trump

JacksinPA said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...sign-up-to-publish-editorials-targeting-trump

The Boston Globe has enlisted more than 100 newspapers from across the country to publish editorials fighting back against President Trump’s repeated attacks on the media.

The Globe has been contacting editorial boards and asking them to publish an editorial on Thursday, CNN reported Saturday.

"We propose to publish an editorial on August 16 on the dangers of the administration's assault on the press and ask others to commit to publishing their own editorials on the same date," The Globe said in its pitch.
=============================================
More than 100 newspapers have signed up so far to support this effort.
Click to expand...

Something they are missing.

There are already hundreds of articles bashing Trump in print.
The lines have already been drawn.
No new converts will be made by this.

Those that think the media sucks will merely use this as giving more ammunition to their point.
Those that think Trump sucks will not be swayed any more in their vitriol.

Does the media really think more "TRUMP SUCKS" articles will sway someone from NOT BELIEVING the media hate him?
More "TRUMP SUCKS" articles will only reinforce the notion the news media hate him.

This is NOT how you sway another's opinion.
This is NOT how you prove the media is unbiased.
It proves just the opposite.

It proves the news media feel they are on some holy crusade to destroy a sitting president.

If you want him gone, then put someone worthy of electing in his place in 2020.
It would not take much to find someone better. You won't have to look that hard.
Give us someone to vote for, and offer a positive message to voters.
This is how we do things in this country.

Has no one figured out yet the TRUMP SUCKS message is ineffective?
Evidently not.
 
Last edited:
PleasantValley said:
Something they are missing.

There are already hundreds of articles bashing Trump in print.
The lines have already been drawn.
No new converts will be made by this.

Those that think the media sucks will merely use this as giving more ammunition to their point.
Those that think Trump sucks will not be swayed any more in their vitriol.

Does the media really think more "TRUMP SUCKS" articles will sway someone from NOT BELIEVING the media hate him?
More "TRUMP SUCKS" articles will only reinforce the notion the news media hate him.

This is NOT how you sway another's opinion.
This is NOT how you prove the media is unbiased.
It proves just the opposite.

It proves the news media feel they are on some holy crusade to destroy a sitting president.

If you want him gone, then put someone worthy of electing in his place in 2020.
It would not take much to find someone better. You won't have to look that hard.
Give us someone to vote for, and offer a positive message to voters.
This is how we do things in this country.

Has no one figured out yet the TRUMP SUCKS message is ineffective?
Evidently not.
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that these "editorials" are to be focused on Trump's attacks on the media. I will give you this much. "Trump sucks" could actually either be reporting or journalistic commentary. It could be reporting about Trump fumbling for the zipper on the front of Putin's fly or it could be a journalistic commentary on Trump generally. That is about all I will give you on this one.
 
jnug said:
It is my understanding that these "editorials" are to be focused on Trump's attacks on the media. I will give you this much. "Trump sucks" could actually either be reporting or journalistic commentary. It could be reporting about Trump fumbling for the zipper on the front of Putin's fly or it could be a journalistic commentary on Trump generally. That is about all I will give you on this one.
Click to expand...

I would appreciate it if you kept your homosexual fantasies to yourself.
I don't swing that way.

I can see, however, you completely disagree with my words in blue.
 
PleasantValley said:
I would appreciate it if you kept your homosexual fantasies to yourself.
I don't swing that way.

I can see, however, you completely disagree with my words in blue.
Click to expand...

I didn't comment on your words in view. Why would I care about the words in blue when you apparently have completely misread the intended focus of the editorial pieces the editors are planning or simply just didn't care.

Frankly, trying to shout down editorial comment is a heck of a lot more dangerous than any particular homosexual I ever heard about.
 
jnug said:
I didn't comment on your words in view. Why would I care about the words in blue when you apparently have completely misread the intended focus of the editorial pieces the editors are planning or simply just didn't care.

Frankly, trying to shout down editorial comment is a heck of a lot more dangerous than any particular homosexual I ever heard about.
Click to expand...

YOU made the implication of homosexual behavior between Trump and Putin.
You did that.
That right there immediately shut down me listening to anything else you might have had to say.
Once you go PROFANE, your posts are treated with DISDAIN....and prove nothing you have to say is of any value anymore after your profanity implication.
Grownups already know this.

This is a good rule of thumb if you ever expect to communicate with anyone in the future.
 
PleasantValley said:
YOU made the implication of homosexual behavior between Trump and Putin.
You did that.
That right there immediately shut down me listening to anything else you might have had to say.
Once you go PROFANE, your posts are treated with DISDAIN....and prove nothing you have to say is of any value anymore after your profanity implication.
Grownups already know this.

This is a good rule of thumb if you ever expect to communicate with anyone in the future.
Click to expand...

Goodie for you!!!! Your last effort at schooling me on communications would have been around Kindergarten.
 
JacksinPA said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...sign-up-to-publish-editorials-targeting-trump

The Boston Globe has enlisted more than 100 newspapers from across the country to publish editorials fighting back against President Trump’s repeated attacks on the media.

The Globe has been contacting editorial boards and asking them to publish an editorial on Thursday, CNN reported Saturday.

"We propose to publish an editorial on August 16 on the dangers of the administration's assault on the press and ask others to commit to publishing their own editorials on the same date," The Globe said in its pitch.
=============================================
More than 100 newspapers have signed up so far to support this effort.
Click to expand...

Only 100??? Does this mean that there will be less anti-Trump editorials on 8/16 than the average day.
 
jnug said:
Goodie for you!!!! Your last effort at schooling me on communications would have been around Kindergarten.
Click to expand...


Good for you. Talk about it all day long if you like.
Just not with me.
You know i am right.
No need to acknowledge it.

There is a way to talk to people and a way to NOT talk to people.
Mentioning homosexual acts in your discourse is NOT a way.

Someone needs to tell you.

Enough of this foolishness. If you choose to be vulgar in your communications, then that is your business.
You have not seemed to have learned this fact yet.
...and I only pointed it out.
What you do with it and how you behave in the future is all up to you.

Bowing out of this discourse.
 
PleasantValley said:
Good for you. Talk about it all day long if you like.
Just not with me.
You know i am right.
No need to acknowledge it.

There is a way to talk to people and a way to NOT talk to people.
Mentioning homosexual acts in your discourse is NOT a way.

Someone needs to tell you.

Enough of this foolishness. If you choose to be vulgar in your communications, then that is your business.
You have not seemed to have learned this fact yet.
...and I only pointed it out.
What you do with it and how you behave in the future is all up to you.

Bowing out of this discourse.
Click to expand...

I don't anything of the sort. For the record you posted that this effort by editorial boards was another TRUMP SUCKS effort. So who brought it up first? Do you not even know what you posted or what that term implies while you try to project?

hahahahaha...ah...ah....hahahaha....ah
 
Last edited:
jnug said:
l

They are not going to do anything of the sort. Editorials are editorials. People need to learn how to read a newspaper again and if you can't maybe THAT should be the arbiter of whether or not you can vote, not whether or not you have a driver's license. We have become about as cement headed as it gets.

Lets review:
Editorials are not news, they are editorials (there is no other way to say this one. That is how basic it is)
Journalistic comment is not news
facebook is not news
tweets are not reporting
Click to expand...

People aren't going to react to the editorials, Journalistic comments, Facebook and Tweets that journalists post?

Of course they will.
 
JacksinPA said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...sign-up-to-publish-editorials-targeting-trump

The Boston Globe has enlisted more than 100 newspapers from across the country to publish editorials fighting back against President Trump’s repeated attacks on the media.

The Globe has been contacting editorial boards and asking them to publish an editorial on Thursday, CNN reported Saturday.

"We propose to publish an editorial on August 16 on the dangers of the administration's assault on the press and ask others to commit to publishing their own editorials on the same date," The Globe said in its pitch.
=============================================
More than 100 newspapers have signed up so far to support this effort.
Click to expand...

So, angered by Trump's charge that it feigns independence while acting as a unified coordinated attack machine, the press responds with a unified coordinated attack on Trump. What a bunch of geniuses.

This will, I think, further damage their credibility. If Trump really were out to destroy the free press he could hardly do any better than what they are doing to themselves.
 
Floridafan said:
They do not attack but simply point out the fact that trump lies every single time he speaks. Admit it.
Click to expand...
If trump stopped saying and doing stupid ****, and if he had not committed crimes and surround himself with criminals the press would not report on them.

Trump blames the media for reporting the stupid **** he dose.
 
JacksinPA said:
Good. Our democracy depends on there being a free press & destroying that free press seems to have been one of the items on Putin's agenda for Trump.
Click to expand...

No one has done anything to limit the free press. Look...there are 100 newspapers organizing to have an anti-Trump circle jerk. They'll do that instead of doing the thing they need to to fix their public image, which is stop doing such a piss-poor job and finding some integrity and truth back into their rotting profession.
 
azgreg said:
What's the old saying? "Don't pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel."
Click to expand...

We have Twitter now. Pretty sure the press has lower public opinion ratings than Trump does.
 
Floridafan said:
They do not attack but simply point out the fact that trump lies every single time he speaks. Admit it.
Click to expand...

Nope...they attack him. Sorry that's hard for you to understand.
 
Kal'Stang said:
1,286 daily news paper companies in the US. 100 isn't much.

Wonder why these 100 didn't do this with Obama when he attacked the press. Or Bush jr. Or Clinton. Or Bush Sr. etc etc etc. Oh wait...we're just going to ignore those aren't we?
Click to expand...

It's about a little over 8% of all newspapers but you have to start somewhere. Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day. :)


IMO, the main reason why Obama, Dubya, Clinton, G.H.W. Bush etc weren't attacked in most cases is that they knew how to play the game with the MSM; true there might have been minor flareups but they were far and few; those that did occur in most cases were not as mean spirited and biting as they are now with the Trump administration plus Trump tends to make it personal as well. Remember, contrary to popular belief, the MSM people happen to be human beings and have feelings to boot. When you constantly take it to a higher level and make it personal its only natural that those whom you heckle are going to snap back at you.
 
JacksinPA said:
http://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...sign-up-to-publish-editorials-targeting-trump

The Boston Globe has enlisted more than 100 newspapers from across the country to publish editorials fighting back against President Trump’s repeated attacks on the media.

The Globe has been contacting editorial boards and asking them to publish an editorial on Thursday, CNN reported Saturday.

"We propose to publish an editorial on August 16 on the dangers of the administration's assault on the press and ask others to commit to publishing their own editorials on the same date," The Globe said in its pitch.
=============================================
More than 100 newspapers have signed up so far to support this effort.
Click to expand...

David and Goliath. David wins in the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom