Category Archives: media news

media news, national news, political news, Uncategorized

Candidates looking like horses

horse race

Democrats’ symbol is the donkey.

Republicans’ is the elephant.

Both beasts are looking more like horses, especially as pundits discuss the upcoming 2016 presidential political campaign.

Since most of the chatter is on the GOP side, let’s focus on that one.

How much do we really know about all 16 people who are seeking the Republican nomination? My hunch is not much … at all, if anything. No, we’ve been hearing a lot about polls. Who’s up? Who’s down? Who’s on the move — up or down? What happened to the formerly formidable candidates? How can they get themselves back up again?

Horse-race politics is back with a vengeance.

We keep hearing about it and about how much of a negative influence it has on the nature of the campaign to become leader of the Free World, commander in chief of the greatest military in world history, chief executive of the federal government — all that stuff.

We get fixated on the leaders. Can they keep their lead?

Then we zero in on the statements they make in order to become one of the leaders. That’s been at the top of the discussion list of late. I admit to joining that pack. I’m not proud of it. I’ll try to mend my ways.

But the commentary today must focus on why the media keep covering these campaigns as if they’re races to the finish line.

I’ll blame two of the major news networks for feeding the 2016 version of this frenzy. Fox and CNN are going to be hosts for the first two GOP joint appearances. They set down some ground rules that include poll-driven data: Only the top dogs are allowed.

Don’t all the candidates deserve to be heard? Don’t all of them have something of value to say? Aren’t the media obligated to give them all a chance to state their case before as many people as possible?

Isn’t that what our political system is supposed to foster, a free exchange among all the individuals running for the most important political office in the land — if not on the planet?

That’s not happening. We’re focusing instead on the horse race, which has been the norm of political coverage perhaps since the advent of television as a major information source.

I want to hear more from and about the candidates and how each of them intends to fight the war against terror, keep the country’s economy moving forward … you know, the stuff that matters.

The sound bites that seek to elevate candidates’ polling standing? The analysis from the talking heads about whether so-and-so will be in the debate based on his or her polling?

Honestly, I find it boring to the max.

I might need to take a vow to ignore the polls and concentrate on the policy statements. I now will ponder precisely that. I’ll get back to you.

 

 

 

 

media news

Newspaper jargon is changing

You know what “jargon” means, yes?

If not, I’ll tell you: It’s an esoteric dialect that only those who practice the craft being described can understand.

Doctors speak to each other in jargon; so do lawyers; same, I suppose, for accountants, automobile salespeople or restaurant managers. They can use language only they get.

Well, newspaper editors and reporters have jargon, too. It involves words and phrases such as “burying the lead,” “head bust,” “cutline,” or “filling a hole.”

Those of us who toiled in the newspaper business know those terms and what they mean.

Well, it’s been determined that newspaper jargon is changing. It’s not even unique to newspapers any longer. It has become a form of digital-speak.

The Dallas Morning News this past week announced buyouts involving 167 newsroom employees. Some of them are well-known names to those who read the newspaper.

http://dallas.culturemap.com/news/city-life/07-24-15-dallas-morning-news-buyout-familiar-names/

Perhaps the most telling comment came from a friend of mine, who happens to be an old-school, ink-stained newspaper guy in eastern New Mexico, who said that the phrase “‘We’re all salespeople now’ never should come from a newspaper editor.”

Yet that’s what came from the mouth of DMN editor Mike Wilson in announcing the buyouts.

The Dallas Morning News is going to emphasize its digital operation. Wilson said the personnel being bought out were going to be replaced by individuals who will be more digitally minded. He called the replacements “outstanding digital journalists.”

According to a story posted on an online site: “In a recent digital-lingo-filled interview with Columbia Journalism Review, Wilson said that the staff would need to be better at building audience online, stating, ‘We are all salespeople now.’ He described categories such as education and the (Dallas) Cowboys as ‘verticals,’ and used the verb ‘curate.'”

Verticals? Curate? What the … ?

Some of the bigger newspapers in the country are going digital. The Dallas Morning News is just the latest.

There once was a time when print journalists were secretly proud that they could talk to each other in a language no one else understood. Well, folks, those days appear to be over. Whoever is left standing after all these purges is going to learn a whole new language.

media news, national news, political news

Thicken your skin, Donald; it’s going to get worse

Let’s see if I have this right.

Donald Trump enters the Republican Party presidential primary field and immediately rakes Mexican illegal immigrants over the coals and then says Sen. John McCain isn’t a real war hero because, as Trump said, he likes “people who weren’t captured” by the enemy in wartime.

Then the Des Moines Register, Iowa’ leading newspaper, publishes a scathing editorial urging Trump to withdraw from the campaign. He called Trump an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And then Trump bans the Register from covering a campaign event in Iowa.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/trump-bans-des-moines-register-from-iowa-campaign-event-120615.html

And why? Because the Register was offering an opinion on the state of play in the GOP and Trump’s role in this campaign. That’s part of the paper’s mission, its franchise, its duty to those who read the publication.

Trump, though, just didn’t like the editorial. So, he decided to kick the paper out of his campaign event.

Wow! This is getting really, really fun to watch.

Trump’s got to get some thicker skin. Hey, he says he’s the master of the universe — or words more or less to that effect. Does the Man Who Can Fix Any Problem on Earth really have to react so badly because a newspaper is performing its duty?

I would think one with the clout that Trump proclaims wouldn’t have to worry about what a measly little media outlet would have to say about him.

This campaign is shaping up already as an amazing sideshow of insults, gotchas, payback and political stunt work.

Good grief! Those Iowa caucuses are still months away.

Donald, you need to toughen up. It’s only going to get worse.

media news, national news, political news

Trump is driving the media crazy

Donald Trump is confounding everyone who observes politics for a living … or for a hobby.

The most profound impact might be on the media and how they seek to cover this guy.

The New York Times has published an interesting analysis of the media coverage of this individual’s amazing rise to the top of the political heap.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump%e2%80%99s-wealth-and-poll-numbers-complicate-news-media%e2%80%99s-coverage/ar-AAdtnhP

It notes that his wealth and poll numbers are giving the media fits as they try to make sense of what this person means to the 2016 race for the presidency. Is he for real? Is he a showman who is seeking to elevate his real brand, which is as a reality-TV huckster? Or is this guy really in it for the long haul, seeking to change the course of American history?

Trump recently filed the financial disclosure forms needed to cement his run for the Republican presidential nomination. Some folks — me, included — thought that perhaps he wouldn’t file those forms, and that his campaign would go away after a suitable amount of fanfare and rhetorical fireworks.

So, he’s taken the next step.

Trump is getting a lot of ink and air time. Some pundits on the right think the media hate this guy. I disagree.

I believe the media love him, not because he’s Donald Trump and he’s going to single-handedly “make America great again,” as he proclaims. They love him because he sells newspapers and brings viewers to TV screens.

And yes, there’s a certain entertainment value associated with this Trump’s pronouncements, not to mention the angry response he evokes from his fellow Republican presidential candidates — and from those who’ve run for the office previously; Democratic candidates and “strategists,” of course, are loving every minute of this traveling carnival.

I’m going to keep believing, though, that Trump is a flash in the pan. His comments about Sen. John McCain’s war record, I believe, were too much for many serious Americans and I’ll keep insisting that his statement making light of McCain’s five-year captivity in a North Vietnamese prison cell will become the single event that dooms his candidacy for the White House.

However, until he exits the arena, the media will keep covering him — and will keep struggling with trying to decide just how to do so.

Good luck.

media news, national news, political news, Vietnam War

Do the media really hate Trump?

2 Comments

alg-donald-trump-jpg

Bill O’Reilly says the media hate Donald Trump because he doesn’t fear them.

Sure. Trump doesn’t fear the media. I get that.

But do the media really hate this guy? I think not.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bill-oreilly-the-media-despise-trump-because-he-124751397551.html

You see, the media get ratings boosts and readership bumps whenever this guy opens his mouth. Now that he’s running for president of the United States of America, the media have to report on the things he says. Most of those things are, well, utter nonsense.

Still, the media have to cover it. The way I see it, the media are doing their job.

It’s fair to ask, perhaps: Do the media have to give so much ink and air time to someone who has zero chance of being nominated by the Republican Party, let alone elected president of the United States? I think so. He’s polling quite well at the moment, grabbing an estimated 20-plus percent approval in a field of what seems like hundreds of GOP presidential candidates.

However, most of us — I think — realize that none of this is about Trump actually becoming president. It’s about Trump liking the sound of his own voice.

Are the media seeking to “punish” Trump because he’s such a blowhard? O’Reilly thinks they are: “(T)he media believe they need to punish Mr. Trump for being disrespectful and not cowering before them. Plus they don’t like his politics, generally speaking.”

It’s not just the media who are being critical, Bill-O. His fellow Republican candidates have fired plenty of ammo at Trump for the purely idiotic things he’s said, notably about many of them — not to mention what he’s said about one-time GOP presidential nominee and, yes, Vietnam War hero John McCain.

I don’t think there’s media “hate” at play.

The longer Trump keeps popping off, the more the media have to cover him. In this strange and wacky world where pop culture intersects with public policy, the media will keep reaping the benefit.

Keep blathering, Donald.

media news, political news

Yes, John McCain is a hero

I think I’ve officially heard all there is to hear.

Of all the things that have poured out of Donald Trump’s mouth, he finally said more than most Americans can handle.

He actually said that U.S. Sen. John McCain does not qualify as a war hero. He really and truly denigrated the service McCain performed for his country.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-attack-on-john-mccain-war-record-is-new-low-in-us-politics/ar-AAdbgjc

Is there anything that Trump will not declare off limits? Has this political buffoon said enough?

I am not a political fan of Sen. McCain. I do not like his world view. I didn’t vote for him when he ran for president in 2008. But as God himself is my witness, I truly admire this man’s service. I consider him to be a heroic figure.

And for Trump to ignite the firestorm that he’s ignited through utterly careless musings about someone who — in what passes for his political judgment — criticized him for earlier statements, well, that goes so far beyond the pale it defies Americans’ ability to express their rage in harsh enough terms.

Not only that … yes, there’s more, Trump did not serve in our nation’s military. He obtained student deferments during the Vietnam War. By my standard, Trump qualifies as a “chicken hawk,” who has zero standing to comment on someone who did serve — and did so with remarkable valor and, oh yeah, heroism.

McCain never has leaned on his service during the Vietnam War to promote a political cause. He was shot down over Hanoi in 1967; he suffered serious injuries as he parachuted into a lake in the middle of the city. He was taken captive, thrown into a cell, beaten nearly to death, suffered other forms of torture. He was placed into solitary confinement, brought out, beaten and tortured some more and then returned to solitary.

He was given a chance for an early release as a POW; the North Vietnamese thought they could get political mileage out of releasing young McCain early, as his father was a senior naval officer who helped shape U.S. war policy in Vietnam. McCain declined to be released. His payback for refusal? More torture.

That doesn’t qualify him as a hero?

Donald Trump has lost his marbles.

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, another GOP presidential candidate and an Air Force veteran, said Trump’s attack on McCain is a “new low in American politics” and demanded that Trump “immediately withdraw from the race for president.”

Aww, heck. Trump ought to stay in the race — and keep shooting off his mouth.

media news

Of course the question was intended to offend

Major Garrett, CBS News’s chief White House correspondent, and I have something in common.

We both worked for the same person, although at different times.

How’s that for name-dropping?

Garrett went to work for the Amarillo Globe-News back in the old days. The then-editor of the paper, Garet von Netzer, hired him; von Netzer later would become publisher of the paper and then he hired yours truly, although long after Garrett had moved on.

Having laid down that useless predicate, let me now say that Major Garrett asked a patently offensive question of President Obama, to which the president responded appropriately.

The question involved four Americans held captive in Iran and Garrett wondered how the president could be “content” that they’re still being held on trumped-up charges while he is “celebrating” the nuclear deal worked out with the Islamic Republic.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obama-major-garrett-shuts-down-press-conference-120156.html?hp=b2_r1

Obama took offense at the tone of the question. He scolded Garrett, saying he “should know better” than to ask a question that contained “nonsense.”

The president said he isn’t “content” over the Americans’ continued captivity and said he and his team are “working diligently” to secure freedom for the individuals.

What irks me about the question and its aftermath is how Major Garrett insisted it wasn’t intended to ruffle the president. He didn’t apologize and he said it was not asked to call attention to himself.

May I be blunt? That’s pure baloney.

That’s how it goes among the White House press corps. It’s always about getting in a question intended to call attention to the inquiry and to the person making it. Such gamesmanship has been going on for, oh, since the beginning of these televised events dating back to the days when President Kennedy introduced them to the public and turned them into some form of entertainment.

CBS’s Dan Rather famously sought to get under President Nixon’s skin during the Watergate scandal; ABC’s Sam Donaldson did the same thing to President Reagan over the course of many years; Fox’s Ed Henry does the same thing today with President Obama.

Well, now Henry and others have company in the “gotcha” hall of fame.

Major Garrett asked an appropriate question. He just inserted a certain word — “content” — that framed it in a way that got Barack Obama’s dander up.

I would bet that was his intent all along.

 

International news, media news

Too early to judge Iran nuke deal

Listen to the mainstream media on both ends — conservative and liberal — and the Iran nuclear deal is either the precursor to World War III or the agreement that will bring a comprehensive peace to a region that’s never known it.

Fox News this morning was having its usual fun blasting the “liberal mainstream media” for gushing all over the deal that seeks to block Iran’s ability to acquire a nuclear weapon. The caption on the screen as the “Fox and Friends” talking heads were blathering on noted “liberal bias” in the media’s coverage of the agreement. That stuff just slays me, given that Fox never recognizes its own conservative bias.

Whatever.

I’m not going to draw any firm conclusions about the deal just yet.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obama-team-split-over-next-steps-with-iran-120130.html?hp=lc1_4

I remain cautiously hopeful that the deal will produce the desired result. One of the Obama administration talking points is that it “blocks all pathways” for Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Israeli officials — led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — say it’s dangerous in the extreme, as it doesn’t prevent Iran from making mischief in the Middle East.

The economic sanctions? They’ll be lifted over time, giving Iran needed money to rebuild its shattered economy — which was made that way by the sanctions.

What if Iran cheats? What if the Iranians don’t do what they say? The sanctions return.

Is the deal perfect? No. Is it the disaster that congressional Republicans predict it will become? No.

The mainstream media — all of it all along the political spectrum — need to take a breath and listen intently to the debate that’s about to unfold.

Assuming, of course, that the debate isn’t overtaken by hysterical politicians.

 

media news

Dylan Ratigan … I have found you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGvhR_6iTuY&list=PLPVve34yolHZgq75xDfZtni_xDubfmbcy&index=1

Do you remember a guy named Dylan Ratigan?

He used to have a talk show on MSNBC. He’s not a flaming liberal, which is what conservatives say about MSBNC’s talking heads. He’s more of, um, an equal-opportunity critic. During the financial crisis of late 2008 and early 2009, he coined the term “banksters” to describe the financial geniuses who got the country into the mess it found itself.

Ratigan had his show. Then he was gone.

I’ve been missing the guy ever since.

Well, I recently located a YouTube link with some snippets of Ratigan’s rants. They’re called “The Real Ratigan.”

The link is attached to this blog post.

One of the segments mentions how Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are the only two of the current crop of presidential candidates who tell us what’s in their hearts and on their minds. They don’t give us “poll-tested talking points.”

He likes that about both men.

I wish Ratigan would be a tad more visible and more in demand as a “contributor” to whichever network is willing to have this guy share his views on politics, policy and the state of affairs in the United States.

media news, national news

Gov. Haley is working through her pain

haley

Gov. Nikki Haley, R-S.C., today ended a nationally televised interview with an extraordinary answer.

I think she has just emerged as perhaps my favorite Republican.

“Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd asked Gov. Haley how she felt about her probable rise in polling as a potential national candidate on a GOP presidential ticket. She called it “painful.”

She was on the broadcast to talk about the striking of the Confederate battle flag that had flown over the South Carolina statehouse grounds since the 1960s in defiance of the Voting Rights Act. The flag came down and Haley has become a national figure as a result.

SC governor: National spotlight is ‘painful’

Mentioning the slaughter of African-Americans in the Charleston church, Haley said: “Nine people died. We have been dealing with nine funerals.”

“That’s what I want people talking about – the Emanuel nine and how they forever changed this country,” Haley added.

Haley’s response to a question posed in good faith brought a visible response from Todd, who had asked the question. I don’t think he expected such an eloquent and graceful answer.

“We’ve already been moving in this direction,” she said of the flag removal. “We’re not the state that everybody thinks we are. “We didn’t have people getting out of hand – we had hugs,” Haley said of the flag’s lowering.“We love our God, we love our country, we love our state and we love each other,” Haley said of South Carolina’s people.

Yes, she was thinking of those nine men and women, one of whom, Haley recalled, begged the shooter to stop the carnage. The gunman killed him anyway.

It was an astonishing end to a gripping interview.

Well said, Gov. Haley.