USA Politics

The fake, leftist mainstream media is reporting it as dangerous, racist and decisive. Fox news keep kissing his ass.
 
I read somewhere that Fox had criticised him over something. He has come across as unhinged rather than maverick lately.
 
Every time Fox criticises him, he gets mad at them and then recommends his followers watch OANN, which is like Fox News times a thousand.
 
I think Trump ruined it for any non-lawyer/career politician trying to run for president without any previous experience. Reagan was president of the actors guild, then governor of California. Jesse Ventura, a pro wrestler and actor, was governor of Minnesota. So your working experience doesn't automatically disqualify you from office, but to jump straight to president is stupid at worst, naive at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
The media coverage of Trump is weird and a lot more complicated than you might think. There are definitely people on Fox who criticize him, but the type of criticism varies. The daytime Fox programs, which are based more on straight reporting and have a lower viewership, have several anchors who frequently fact check Trump. If he says something that is false, they often say so. The prime time Fox hosts, which are the ones that get the most attention and are known for sycophancy (think Hannity/Carlson), are much less likely to criticize Trump. When they do, it’s usually because he’s not Trump-y enough. Carlson in particular has recently criticized the Republicans for not going far enough with the populism. There’s a thought that his line of thinking will represent the GOP post Trump.

That’s cable news. More respected publications like WaPo, NYT, Politico, are trying to straddle this uncomfortable line between impartiality and journalistic integrity. They are such a frequent source of Trump’s ire that they try hard not to seem biased but it doesn’t matter because Trump will rage anyway. For example a headline might print something trump says that is blatantly false but will treat it as an official statement and maybe fact check somewhere in the article but present it as a two sides of the story thing. Imo they should just present falsehoods as falsehoods. Of course you’re going to be biased if you have one side that lies compulsively. At least in recent times I think these publications are starting to be less apologetic about it and Trump is definitely more unhinged than usual.
 
I thought about that while I was posting. You could also look at WSJ as a conservative leaning publication that still posts factual information.

Edit: Conservative leaning from an editorial standpoint I mean
 
Mosh said:
There are definitely people on Fox who criticize him, but the type of criticism varies. The daytime Fox programs, which are based more on straight reporting and have a lower viewership, have several anchors who frequently fact check Trump. If he says something that is false, they often say so. The prime time Fox hosts, which are the ones that get the most attention and are known for sycophancy (think Hannity/Carlson), are much less likely to criticize Trump.
Click to expand...
Does the opposite hold for CNN or is it 24/7 anti-Trump whining?
 
Of course, just like with Obama, it would have nothing to do with the fact that they're black.
 
www.reuters.com

Mexican president thanks Trump for not mentioning border wall at summit

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on Friday expressed gratitude to Donald Trump for avoiding in public the thorny subject of the U.S. president's promised border wall during a summit in Washington earlier this week.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

"Thanks Donald, for not being as discriminatory as usual. Great to catch up and thanks for not yapping on about how we should pay for the anti-bad-hombres wall."
 
Man, the much hyped release of this summer, Dumb and Dumber 3: Election Year, is finally here, let's see how it does opening weekend, can't wait for more reviews on Monday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top