Tag Archives: political media

Media become pols’ chosen villain

The president of the United States is taking dead aim at the national political media.

He calls them “dishonest.” Donald Trump even has called reporters “among the most dishonest people on Earth.”

Ouch and double-ouch!

Of course, I don’t believe that.

But I did scrounge up an earlier item I posted on this blog about one political medium that I found implicitly fair, honest and accurate.

It’s the Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network. I had an experience with C-SPAN that I want to re-share again today.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2016/01/c-span-worked-miracles-with-this-spot/

I posted this item nearly a year ago. It is intended to speak the nuanced skill associated with editing video recording and making the interviewee sound a whole lot smarter than he is. In my case, that’s what C-SPAN did to near perfection.

National Public Radio did the same thing — again to yours truly — during the 2008 presidential campaign. NPR wanted to talk to two newspaper editors from disparate regions of the country. They got in touch with me at the Amarillo Globe-News, which serves a solidly Republican region; NPR also talked to the editor of the Dayton Daily News, where the Barack Obama-John McCain was much more competitive.

Again, NPR worked its magic. I stammered my way through a 30-minute conversation with the radio host and my colleague in Dayton. But you didn’t hear all that clumsiness when NPR aired on its “Weekend Edition” broadcast. Here is what I wrote about that experience:

https://highplainsblogger.com/2010/02/npr-reaches-out-to-the-heartland/

I want to stand up for my colleagues in the media.

They aren’t “dishonest.” Those who work for actual news organizations — not the purveyors of fake news — do so in good conscience and with the singular mission to report the truth.

 

Now … the wait begins

aajcgbc

I’m out.

You’ve heard from me countless times already about how much I detest Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. I’ve said much less about Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. I guess I’ve fallen into the trap that lures people to speak negatively more readily than they speak positively.

So, with less than two days to go before we decide this presidential election, I’m done commenting on the candidates.

I’m going to await the results along with the rest of a dispirited nation.

Those who know me best might recognize that I am generally an optimist. I tend to see the good in people and in institutions. This election campaign — which has gone on non-stop for a year and a half — has tested that optimistic outlook to the max.

I am unhappy with the choices we face. I’ll make my own choice on Tuesday. My wife and I plan to vote early on Election Day, hoping to get to the polling place before the most of the rest of our neighbors wake up.

For me, it’s never really been a close call. I had considered a third party choice. I’ve decided against that.

My vote is more valuable than for me to cast it as a protest. On that score, my idealism remains strong.

If only I felt better about the process we’ve witnessed for an interminable length of time or about the candidates who’ve been responsible for bringing this process about.

What’s more, if only I felt better about the media that have contributed to this miserable exercise.

Ponder when elections are ‘rigged’

donald-trump4

Donald J. Trump is playing the “rigged election”  card as if it’s a new gambit.

The Republican presidential nominee says the electoral system is “rigged.” He says voter fraud is rampant at polling places. He blames the media for “rigging” its coverage of his battle with Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I must add, too, that he says all this without providing a scintilla of credible evidence.

Well, way back in the early days of the GOP primary, Trump lost the Iowa caucus to Texas U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz. His excuse then? It was “rigged,” he said. Cruz’s team stole that one from Trump, said the eventual party nominee.

The rigged election stuff is the mantra of someone who’s going to lose. That’s all it is.

As for the media bias he keeps harping on, I feel a need to mention only this: The media gave Trump invaluable free advertising and publicity throughout his march to the GOP nomination. He called a press event? The media were there. He made a statement of any kind, carrying any kind of weight? The media covered it like a blanket. Trump would fire off an accusation or call an opponent a schoolyard-style name? Why, the media were on that, too.

Trump is about to lose his first and likely final campaign for public office. He is sounding like someone who doesn’t know how to lose with grace and class.

What’s with the first-name usage for Hillary?

hillaryclinton-101-1451652269

I’ve wondered about this for nearly as long as Hillary Rodham Clinton has been in public life — which seems like forever.

Why do the media, the political class, historians and Mr. and Mrs. J.Q. Public refer to the Democratic nominee for president as “Hillary”?

I’ll admit to doing it in casual conversation. My wife and I talk about this election all the time. We’re caught up by it. We’re enthralled — if that’s the right word — by all of its patently bizarre twists and turns.

Then I’ll toss out something like this: “Did you hear what Hillary and Trump said today?” My wife identifies the two major-party candidates the same way.

The Republican nominee doesn’t get the same air of familiarity, if that’s what it is. We refer to Donald J. Trump as “Trump.” I’m inclined to use more, um, descriptive terminology at times. And yes, I’m quite sure those on the other side attach the same pejorative qualifiers to Hillary.

See, there I go again … falling into that first-name trap.

I mean no disrespect. I take her as seriously as I do any other politician, male or female.

I’ll admit to using first names on other pols. Newt, Mitt and Jeb are my favorites. Their names are unusual enough that you don’t need to last names to know about whom one is referring. It’s kind of like Wilt, Arnie, Tiger and Kareem … you know?

There’s got to be a psychologist out there who can explain it to me.

Hey, do you think Dr. Phil might be looking for a topic to cover on his TV show.

Covering a ‘charlatan’? Do so thoroughly

25kristof-master675

I totally understand where Nicholas Kristof is coming from as he implores the media to do a better job of covering a “charlatan” such as Donald J. Trump.

His column in the Sunday New York Times lays it out there.

The media must call the Republican nominee out in “real time” for the lies he tells about himself, his business ventures, his foes and the state of American standing in the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/opinion/sunday/how-to-cover-a-charlatan-like-trump.html?_r=0

Yes, by all means, do so with great vigor.

Tonight, though, as Trump stands for 90 minutes on that stage with Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton, the moderator has one job only: to moderate the commercial-free spectacle.

NBC News’s Lester Holt is an accomplished broadcast journalist and anchor. He will ask tough and probing questions of the candidates, who’ll be forced to answer each other.

As for the fact-checking, Holt will have plenty of help from fellow journalists watching from near and far to do what they must do: set the record straight for voters who will have to decide whether to believe the charlatan masquerading as a serious candidate for president of the United States of America.

This should be a fun evening. Don’t you think?

CNN crosses ethical line

corey

Right-wing critics of the so-called “liberal mainstream media” like to pound on CNN for its alleged bias against conservative politicians.

That’s their opinion, I suppose.

Then we have this bit of news: Former Donald J. Trump Republican campaign manager Corey Lewandowski — who is being paid by CNN to provide political commentary — also is being paid by Trump’s presidential campaign. Lewandowski is set to receive another half-million bucks by the end of the year.

Trump fired Lewandowski and then offered a handsome severance package on his way out.

This is so very wrong on so many levels.

There is supposed to be a line that separates media organizations from partisan political activity. Many cable and broadcast news networks have hired former political hands to provide commentary. They come from both political parties and they represent all manner of philosophy, principle and partisan bias.

The Lewandowski matter, though, is markedly different.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/corey-lewandowski-set-to-collect-nearly-dollar500000-from-trump-campaign/ar-BBwyRL0?li=BBnb7Kz

CNN often is criticized by right-wing pols and operatives. They refer to the network derisively as the “Clinton News Network.” Lewandowski’s compensation from an active Republican presidential candidate would seem to silence that criticism. It’s not likely.

Meanwhile, Lewandowski is going to offer his political analysis on the air while being paid by one of the candidates about who he is commenting.

Talk about not passing the “smell test.” This dubious coziness stinks to high heaven.

Media, Trump need to end their love affair

bbwhsff

Donald J. Trump’s newfound friends in the conservative political movement need to cease declaring that the “mainstream liberal media” are out to “get” their guy.

That they despise Trump, and that the GOP presidential nominee hates them in return.

They love each other. The media love Trump, who in turn loves the media. He plays the media for the suckers they are.

He called a press conference in which he said he would make a major policy announcement. Instead, he used the event to tout some business deal, a hotel, in which he boasted about how great it is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/its-time-for-tv-news-to-stop-playing-the-stooge-for-donald-trump/2016/09/16/bc66812e-7c28-11e6-ac8e-cf8e0dd91dc7_story.html

The press conference was supposed to center on Trump ending his racist rants about President Obama’s birth. It wasn’t about that. Sure, he said Obama “was born in the United States. Period.” But the bulk of the event was to shower praise on himself his business success.

This is where Trump is crossing a very troubling line: mixing personal business with a campaign for the nation’s highest political office.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump%E2%80%99s-anything-goes-campaign-sets-an-alarming-political-precedent/ar-BBwi7sm?li=BBmkt5R

Indeed, this latest stunt is part of a pattern.

The media are playing a major role in it.

Trump will continue to rant and rail about the “dishonest political press.” His supporters will cheer him on. He’ll give them more of the same. They’ll cheer him even more loudly.

Meantime, the rest of us are left scratching our heads and wondering: When will this charade stop?

Here come the conspiracy theories

GTY_hillary_clinton_donald_trump_split_jt_150912_16x9_992

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been deemed the “presumptive presidential nominee” for the Democratic Party.

Wait for it. Here come the conspiracy theories from the supporters of Bernie Sanders, who are saying that the media should have waited to report the news.

Sure thing. I believe that’s one definition of “prior restraint.”

I do not think that’s doable in a society that supposedly prides itself in a media that isn’t controlled, manipulated or coerced into hiding news as it happens.

The Associated Press has tabulated the pledged delegates and the so-called “super delegates” that the Democratic Party uses to nominate its presidential candidates. AP has determined that, yep, Clinton has put the nomination out of reach.

Sen. Sanders has been pledging to take this fight all the way to the party nominating convention this summer in Philadelphia. Fine. That’s his right.

Sanders and his supporters have said the “mainstream media” are in cahoots with the party brass in wanting Clinton nominated.

I’m not crazy about this super delegate business. I’d prefer that Democrats followed the Republican model in apportioning convention delegates. The “supers” comprise elected officials or other power party bigwigs who are free to vote for whomever they want. Given that the U.S. Constitution makes no mention of political parties, this process is done strictly at the party level; it’s not written in law anywhere.

This, though, is how the Democrats do it. It’s worked so far.

So now we have a presumptive Democratic nominee to join the presumptive Republican nominee. It’s likely “game over” for Sanders, just as it’s over for all of the 16 Republicans who ran against Donald J. Trump for that party’s nomination.

Let’s dispense with the conspiracy theories.

Now we get to witness Clinton vs. Trump.

Oh, boy! Now, if only we could hope for a dignified and high-minded contest for the presidency of the United States of America.

If only …

 

Media simply ‘afflicting the comfortable’

donald-trump

Journalism has its share of clichés that seek to define its mission.

One of them is to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.”

It doesn’t betray a bias, per se. It simply defines one of the tenets that drives journalists to do their job with thoroughness, while being fair to those they are examining.

Thus, a group of journalists sat before Donald J. Trump on Tuesday and grilled the presumptive Republican presidential nomination on donations he said he made to veterans organizations.

Trump’s response was to throw a tantrum.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/01/opinions/donald-trump-tantrum-media-role-louis/index.html

The issue at hand dealt with whether Trump actually donated the amount of money he said he had donated to veterans organizations.

Washington Post reporters had detected a discrepancy in what Trump had said, that the money went to the organizations many months after he said he made the donation. So, media representatives questioned him about that discrepancy, only to have Trump respond with another round of name-calling and insults.

Trump seems to demonstrate a casual disregard for the facts. He said after the 9/11 attacks that he witnessed “thousands and thousands of Muslims” cheering the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

He didn’t witness anything of the sort.

Some pundits have accused Trump of being a “pathological liar,” defining it as a case in which the candidate tells a lie knowing it to be a lie and understanding full well that others who hear it also know it to be a lie.

It’s the media’s responsibility to ensure that candidates be held accountable for statements they make.

That’s what happened at the news conference Tuesday as the media grilled the candidate on what he said he’d done on behalf of veterans organizations.

Sure, they have “afflicted the comfortable.” It’s their job.

 

This man must think the media will go soft on him

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump reads from a list of donations to veteran's groups, during a news conference in New York, Tuesday, May 31, 2016. (AP Photo/Richard Drew) ORG XMIT: NYRD102

Donald J. Trump’s exhibition of petulance was a sight to behold.

Standing before reporters who had gathered to question him about whether he’d actually raised the money he said he had raised for veterans, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee sought to turn the tables on the questioners.

He called one of them a “sleaze.” He called another one a “loser.” He called the media “dishonest,” and the political media even more dishonest than that.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-veterans-donations-223730

He proclaimed that he didn’t want to make the veterans contributions a big public deal. Oh, but when he backed out of a Fox News debate, he said out loud and in public that he’d raised $6 million and given a million bucks himself.

Media representatives have questioned whether Trump actually raised the money for the veterans. They want Trump to account for the money.

And for that they get called “sleazy”?

Does this individual — the GOP nominee in waiting — expect the media to back off in the highly unlikely event he’s ever elected president?

Listen to the press conference in its entirety. It’s gone viral out there in Social Media Land.

Then get back to me and tell me this guy really is suited for the job he is seeking.