JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Joe Elliott on November 14, 2021, 03:22:39 AM
-
Fake News is Old News.
Lately, Trump supporters are arguing that the main stream news media, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, are covering up or ignoring the plain evidence, that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen from Trump. A huge subset of the overall Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy, this one involving thousands of reporters. And, not just domestic outfits, but overseas ones like the BBC and Reuters.
But having we heard something similar before? Ah, yes, the Kennedy assassination. The media covering this up. Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Rather and a host of others. JFK CTers, like Trump CTers, have no problem in readily accepting news media as being a Large-Secret-Conspiracy by itself. And being just a subset of the overall larger conspiracy. Yes, JFK CTers never used the term “Fake News”. But they follow the same concept.
The truth is, the 1930’s through the 1980’s was a golden era in American reporting. In previous generations, it was pretty bad. Very partisan. Not dedicated to going after the truth. But over a couple of generations, it was very good quality.
What caused it to go downhill? Well, with only 3 main competitors, there was no room for going for a special niche. It made more sense for all three, CBS, NBC and ABC to pursue the truth and try to out compete each other.
But, with the more cable options available, it makes financial sense to specialize in going after a target audience, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN do. Walter Cronkite used to end his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is”. Tucker Carlson should end his with “And that’s all just what you wanted to hear”.
And so, millions of Americans get biased and even obviously false news on TV. Yes, good options are available, like the BBC. But too many turn to a bad option. Forty years ago, the available quality of the news was much better.
-
Fake News is Old News.
Lately, Trump supporters are arguing that the main stream news media, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, are covering up or ignoring the plain evidence, that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen from Trump. A huge subset of the overall Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy, this one involving thousands of reporters. And, not just domestic outfits, but overseas ones like the BBC and Reuters.
But having we heard something similar before? Ah, yes, the Kennedy assassination. The media covering this up. Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Rather and a host of others. JFK CTers, like Trump CTers, have no problem in readily accepting news media as being a Large-Secret-Conspiracy by itself. And being just a subset of the overall larger conspiracy. Yes, JFK CTers never used the term “Fake News”. But they follow the same concept.
The truth is, the 1930’s through the 1980’s was a golden era in American reporting. In previous generations, it was pretty bad. Very partisan. Not dedicated to going after the truth. But over a couple of generations, it was very good quality.
What caused it to go downhill? Well, with only 3 main competitors, there was no room for going for a special niche. It made more sense for all three, CBS, NBC and ABC to pursue the truth and try to out compete each other.
But, with the more cable options available, it makes financial sense to specialize in going after a target audience, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN do. Walter Cronkite used to end his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is”. Tucker Carlson should end his with “And that’s all just what you wanted to hear”.
And so, millions of Americans get biased and even obviously false news on TV. Yes, good options are available, like the BBC. But too many turn to a bad option. Forty years ago, the available quality of the news was much better.
Whether it was the news savvy Buddhist protesters in Vietnam, or JFK “leaking” his propaganda to a national magazine, smart people would try to manipulate the news media back then. And they continue to do so these days. It’s a multi-ring circus that I find to be ridiculous. I very rarely watch any of the news channels on TV anymore. It would have to be a major ongoing event that interests me to get me to watch.
-
It was easier for the government to manipulate and control the Press when there were fewer options for national and world news.
The internet, social media, and smartphones have democratized the Press and weakened the power of gatekeepers in the news media.
While yes, it's true that there is much "fake news" and disinfo in alternative and new media, it's also true that there's "Fake news" and disinfo in traditional media.
Look at the infamous Steele Dossier for example which has been exposed as having been rooted in political opposition research. Several national news media outlets initially treated the Steele Dossier as legitimate raw intelligence on Trump and his associates. Four years later we now know that it was disinformation. That's just one example of many where the Press promoted false narratives or disinformation. The Iraq WMDs controversy is another major example.
I could go on but I don't have the time to list every false narrative or inaccurate story that originated from the national Press.
The distrust that Americans have in the news media exists because it's easier to see through the hidden agendas and false narratives today...
-
Fake News is Old News.
Lately, Trump supporters are arguing that the main stream news media, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, are covering up or ignoring the plain evidence, that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen from Trump. A huge subset of the overall Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy, this one involving thousands of reporters. And, not just domestic outfits, but overseas ones like the BBC and Reuters.
But having we heard something similar before? Ah, yes, the Kennedy assassination. The media covering this up. Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Rather and a host of others. JFK CTers, like Trump CTers, have no problem in readily accepting news media as being a Large-Secret-Conspiracy by itself. And being just a subset of the overall larger conspiracy. Yes, JFK CTers never used the term “Fake News”. But they follow the same concept.
The truth is, the 1930’s through the 1980’s was a golden era in American reporting. In previous generations, it was pretty bad. Very partisan. Not dedicated to going after the truth. But over a couple of generations, it was very good quality.
What caused it to go downhill? Well, with only 3 main competitors, there was no room for going for a special niche. It made more sense for all three, CBS, NBC and ABC to pursue the truth and try to out compete each other.
But, with the more cable options available, it makes financial sense to specialize in going after a target audience, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN do. Walter Cronkite used to end his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is”. Tucker Carlson should end his with “And that’s all just what you wanted to hear”.
And so, millions of Americans get biased and even obviously false news on TV. Yes, good options are available, like the BBC. But too many turn to a bad option. Forty years ago, the available quality of the news was much better.
The fact is Criminal Donald and his cohorts tried to steal the election from the American people with their illegal coup attempt via the courts and when that didn't happen they tried to illegally seize power via a violent insurrection.
The right wing media played right along echoing the same election lies and propaganda. And all the while downplaying the attempted coup by falsely claiming it was "just a walk in the park".
The fact is the media is controlled by the right wing media. Radio and television is dominated by right wing corporations.
AT&T has been funding the far right propaganda Trump channel OAN which also now owns CNN. No surprise that CNN has taken a hard right turn pushing the same bogus propaganda which is why their ratings are near the bottom.
AM radio is completely dominated with far right wing syndicated talk shows all across America.
Also, Sinclair Broadcasting, a corporation that is even more far right than Faux Propaganda owns the majority of ABC, CBS, NBC local tv affiliates. So, when you turn on your local news if it's a Sinclair owned station, you will be fed far right wing commentaries and right wing disinformation by your local anchors reading from a script.
It was even revealed that Twitter was pushing more far right trends on their platform.
So, the media is dominated by far right wing fake news and even on the Sunday morning news programs right wing Republicans are booked as guests pushing their lies and the hosts never challenge them allowing their disinformation to seep into the MSM. The fske right wing disinformation is everywhere.
-
The fact is Criminal Donald and his cohorts tried to steal the election from the American people with their illegal coup attempt via the courts and when that didn't happen they tried to illegally seize power via a violent insurrection.
The right wing media played right along echoing the same election lies and propaganda. And all the while downplaying the attempted coup by falsely claiming it was "just a walk in the park".
The fact is the media is controlled by the right wing media. Radio and television is dominated by right wing corporations.
Some of media is controlled by the right wing. Fox News, Newsmax and OAN, certainly. But the media as a whole? No. Only some media outlets, which cater toward the right-wing audience who want a right-wing slant. Not so much to media corporations as a whole trying to control public opinion.
AT&T has been funding the far right propaganda Trump channel OAN which also now owns CNN. No surprise that CNN has taken a hard right turn pushing the same bogus propaganda which is why their ratings are near the bottom.
I don’t think CNN is pushing the same bogus propaganda. A Google search of:
cnn “January 6”
brings up:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/06/us/capitol-riot-paths-to-insurrection/ (https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/06/us/capitol-riot-paths-to-insurrection/)
“ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY – Paths to Insurrection”
Hardly a right-wing down playing the January 6 riot. Nor do I see any support for the “Stolen Election” claims by CNN.
AM radio is completely dominated with far right wing syndicated talk shows all across America.
Some AM stations that cater to a right-wing audience. But a lot of stations report the regular news.
Also, Sinclair Broadcasting, a corporation that is even more far right than Faux Propaganda owns the majority of ABC, CBS, NBC local tv affiliates. So, when you turn on your local news if it's a Sinclair owned station, you will be fed far right wing commentaries and right wing disinformation by your local anchors reading from a script.
I don’t see “60 minutes”, the most prominent news program, pushing the Trump narrative.
It was even revealed that Twitter was pushing more far right trends on their platform.
So, the media is dominated by far right wing fake news and even on the Sunday morning news programs right wing Republicans are booked as guests pushing their lies and the hosts never challenge them allowing their disinformation to seep into the MSM. The fske right wing disinformation is everywhere.
The media is clearly not dominated by the right-wing. If this were so, why has Trump always complained about the “Fake News” media? While people are free to choose right-wing media stations, on both TV and radio that will mislead them, the bulk of our media sources are still good.
-
It was easier for the government to manipulate and control the Press when there were fewer options for national and world news.
The internet, social media, and smartphones have democratized the Press and weakened the power of gatekeepers in the news media.
While yes, it's true that there is much "fake news" and disinfo in alternative and new media, it's also true that there's "Fake news" and disinfo in traditional media.
Clearly this was not the case. In 1968 Walter Cronkite turned against the Vietnam War, clearly against the wishes of President Johnson. Johnson said "If I have lost Cronkite I have lost middle America." Clearly the government was not controlling the media. In early 1968, the government still wanted the Vietnam war to be continued. Examples of governments which do not control the media do not come any clearer than this. But, somehow, we are to believe that the government was able to control the media about the JFK assassination but not over continuing it’s support of the Vietnam war.
Look at the infamous Steele Dossier for example which has been exposed as having been rooted in political opposition research. Several national news media outlets initially treated the Steele Dossier as legitimate raw intelligence on Trump and his associates. Four years later we now know that it was disinformation. That's just one example of many where the Press promoted false narratives or disinformation. The Iraq WMDs controversy is another major example.
Some of the Steele Dossier contained false information. Christopher Steele made, I think, a good effort to try to find the truth. But not everyone he talked to was telling the truth. Big surprise there. I’m not totally convinced that Russia didn’t help Trump and was not interested in his success. Clearly, they were pleased that he became President. Why wouldn’t they be?
I could go on but I don't have the time to list every false narrative or inaccurate story that originated from the national Press.
The distrust that Americans have in the news media exists because it's easier to see through the hidden agendas and false narratives today...
Americans distrust the main news media largely because of the lies told be certain right-wing media, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN.
-
Clearly this was not the case. In 1968 Walter Cronkite turned against the Vietnam War, clearly against the wishes of President Johnson. Johnson said "If I have lost Cronkite I have lost middle America." Clearly the government was not controlling the media. In early 1968, the government still wanted the Vietnam war to be continued. Examples of governments which do not control the media do not come any clearer than this. But, somehow, we are to believe that the government was able to control the media about the JFK assassination but not over continuing it’s support of the Vietnam war.
Does the government have total control over the Press? No. Never said that. But foreign affairs, war coverage, and national security policy coverage requires cooperation with the military and intelligence services. So those institutions have great influence over national media narratives on certain topics.
When the national press challenges government narratives (as Cronkite did), it's the exception, not the rule. In recent years, the media uncritically supported the Iraq WMDs stuff, the lies about the Anthrax attacks, the lies about the war in Afghanistan, and whitewashed the Al Qaeda-linked rebels that the CIA supported in Syria (ie "Moderate Rebels"). Those are just a few recent examples.
Some of the Steele Dossier contained false information. Christopher Steele made, I think, a good effort to try to find the truth. But not everyone he talked to was telling the truth. Big surprise there. I’m not totally convinced that Russia didn’t help Trump and was not interested in his success. Clearly, they were pleased that he became President. Why wouldn’t they be?
The Steele Dossier was political opposition research. It wasn't a serious intelligence document.
I'm convinced that Putin held a grudge towards the Clintons because they bragged about rigging elections in Russia in the 90s.
What many Russians, but few Americans, know is that 20 years before Russia tried to swing an American presidential election, America tried to swing a presidential election in Russia. The year was 1996. Boris Yeltsin was seeking a second term, and Bill Clinton desperately wanted to help. “I want this guy to win so bad,” he told Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, “it hurts.”
....
In a stunning turnaround, Yeltsin—who had begun the campaign in last place—defeated his communist rival in the election’s final round by 13 percentage points. Talbott declared that “a number of international observers have judged this to be a free and fair election.” But Michael Meadowcroft, a Brit who led the election-observer team of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, later claimed there had been widespread voter fraud, which he had been pressured not to expose.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/07/the-us-has-a-long-history-of-election-meddling/565538/
Whether it's true or not that the US helped steal an election in Russia in the 90s, many Russians believe it to be true. And Yeltsin was a god awful leader for Russia.
Beyond the personal stuff, I don't think Putin cared who won and there's no evidence of cooperation between Trump and Russian government officials.
Americans distrust the main news media largely because of the lies told be certain right-wing media, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN.
I'm politically on the Left and don't watch any of those networks. I mostly read the NY Times and listen to Podcasts.
-
Some of media is controlled by the right wing. Fox News, Newsmax and OAN, certainly. But the media as a whole? No. Only some media outlets, which cater toward the right-wing audience who want a right-wing slant. Not so much to media corporations as a whole trying to control public opinion.
Name one major Liberal Media outlet that is "all liberal" like right wingers have Faux, OAN, and Newsmax which is far right wing. There isn't one.
That's false, ever since Biden was elected, the main stream media took a right slant to boost their ratings. Faux News does what it does because right wing propaganda is an easy way to get ratings, and ratings equal as revenue, and Faux News is a for-profit business. No surprise CNN is going the Faux News route. It’s where the ratings are.
How many telecommunications companies are creating an "all liberal" network like AT&T funded the far right wing disinformation OAN? The answer is 0.
How AT&T helped build far-right One America News
Reuters review of court records shows the role AT&T played in creating and funding OAN, a network that continues to spread conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and the COVID-19 pandemic. Dallas-based AT&T, a mobile-phone and Internet provider, also owns entertainment giant Warner Media, which includes CNN.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-oneamerica-att/
I don’t think CNN is pushing the same bogus propaganda. A Google search of:
cnn “January 6”
brings up:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/06/us/capitol-riot-paths-to-insurrection/ (https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/06/us/capitol-riot-paths-to-insurrection/)
“ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY – Paths to Insurrection”
Hardly a right-wing down playing the January 6 riot. Nor do I see any support for the “Stolen Election” claims by CNN.
CNN just ran a propaganda hit piece against Vice President Harris while promoting a pro Chris Christie documentary. CNN has been pushing right wing talking points for months in order to boost ratings, especially the garbage Chris Cillizza writes in order to generate clicks on the CNN website.
Last night, the CNN prime time 6-9pm show didn't even mention the infrastructure bill once for full hour on the historic day. And then, CNN promoted another full hour with the Chris Christie puff piece documentary. Same garbage they did for Trump in 2016 giving him full 24/7 coverage and barely covered the Clinton campaign. So much for the "liberal media".
Politico was bought by a German right wing billionaire and they too went extremely negative against President Biden. All these news outlets are being sold and then bought by right wingers. That's why the right wing "liberal media" claim is a joke.
German publisher Axel Springer to acquire U.S. news website Politico for over $1 billion
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/axel-springer-acquire-news-website-politico-2021-08-26/
Some AM stations that cater to a right-wing audience. But a lot of stations report the regular news.
AM radio is completely dominated by far right wing syndicated talk shows which are broadcasted on thousands of radio stations. Name a radio broadcasting company that syndicates Liberal talk radio on thousands of stations. Once again, there isn't any.
There are only a handful of all liberal radio stations in the United States on low wattage stations. The news stations still parrot right wing talking points for ratings.
This article is from a decade ago and it details how right wing radio dominates the airwaves. It's been that way since the 90's after the Fairness Doctrine expired in 1987.
Conservative Talk Dominates the Airwaves
https://newsgeneration.com/2010/05/11/conservative-talk-dominates-the-airwaves/
I don’t see “60 minutes”, the most prominent news program, pushing the Trump narrative.
60 Minutes is a national news program which is shown on CBS stations across America. The local news on CBS, NBC, ABC Sinclair owned broadcasting stations push the Trump propaganda narrative. That's what most people watch. Sinclair owns the overwhelming number of CBS, NBC, ABC tv affiliates in the United States.
Check out this article from 2018 to see the far right wing Trump propaganda being pushed in your local tv news markets. And again, there is no broadcasting company that promotes "liberal news" on local ABC, NBC, CBS tv stations.
Sinclair, the pro-Trump, conservative company taking over local news, explained
Sinclair reaches 40 percent of households — and soon will reach 72 percent.
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/3/17180020/sinclair-broadcast-group-conservative-trump-david-smith-local-news-tv-affiliate
The media is clearly not dominated by the right-wing. If this were so, why has Trump always complained about the “Fake News” media? While people are free to choose right-wing media stations, on both TV and radio that will mislead them, the bulk of our media sources are still good.
Criminal Donald calls it "fake news" so he can dismiss his crimes and scandals. That's the scam he runs to get the morons in his base to believe him so they turn against the MSM and only listen to what he says. He's nothing but a fraud and he has already admitted to doing that.
Donald Trump finally admits that “fake news” just means news he doesn’t like
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/5/9/17335306/trump-tweet-twitter-latest-fake-news-credentials
Again, point to one media outlet that is "all liberal" equivalent to right wing Faux, OAN, Newsmax. There isn't any.
We have a main stream media and a far right wing fake news media in the United States. There is no "liberal media" in the United States. Now the main stream media, which is supposed to be independent, has decided to amp up right wing talking points to boost their ratings. So yes, the media is right wing dominated and it's getting worse because independent outlets are being bought up by the far right and they push right wing disinformation. Politico and Sinclair Broadcasting is a perfect example of that.
-
We have a main stream media and a far right wing fake news media in the United States. There is no "liberal media" in the United States. Now the main stream media which is supposed to be independent has decided to amp up right wing talking points to boost their ratings. So yes, the media is right wing dominated and it's getting worse because independent outlets are being bought up by the far right. Politico and Sinclair Broadcasting is a perfect example of that.
Most people who work in the media, maybe 60%, are politically Liberal. So I understand why some view the media as often biased in favor of the Democrats.
However, the news business is a “business”. The news media producers and editors publish what gets the most “clicks” or highest ratings, not what helps Liberals or Democrats politically. Sometimes their business interests align with Democratic agendas (ie anti-Trump coverage) but not always.
-
Most people who work in the media, maybe 60%, are politically Liberal. So I understand why some view the media as often biased in favor of the Democrats.
However, the news business is a “business”. The news media producers and editors publish what gets the most “clicks” or highest ratings, not what helps Liberals or Democrats politically. Sometimes their business interests align with Democratic agendas (ie anti-Trump coverage) but not always.
It doesn't matter what political preference a person has privately. When the network puts out specific talking points that's what gets put out on the air. And if the person wants to keep their job, they will do what the network wants. It's about ratings and profits and nothing else.
Today on MSNBC, Chuck Todd was using the same right wing talking points that you hear on Faux. Chris Christie is getting a pro documentary series of himself on CNN to boost his political aspirations. On the ABC Evening News last night, the Infrastructure Bill wasn't even the lead story. CNN waited an entire hour to mention it during CNN prime time. So where is this "liberal bias" in the main stream media?
Do you think the hosts at Faux actually believe all the COVID and vaccine lies they push when they themselves are vaccinated? Of course not. They need to gin up controversy and keep the sheep angry so they keep tuning in. It's entertainment and not news. And we all suffer because of it.
And these same right wingers on Faux and Newsmax who rail against vaccine mandates tell their viewers "do not comply" to mandates, all comply themselves to vaccine mandates because Faux and Newsmax implemented vaccine mandates as a company policy. So these hacks have to comply to mandates, or they will be out of a job, but tell their sheep viewers to "do not comply" when their own employers mandate them. They are blatant hypocrites. Why aren't they not complying to their mandates like they tell their sheep viewers to do? Because they want to keep their jobs, that's why. So, all the vaccine lies they push is keeping a significant portion of the population from getting vaccinated which is allowing the virus to keep surging. And as a result, they are killing off their own viewers just so they can have high tv ratings and make huge profits.
So, when right wing billionaires buy up independent media outlets and start pushing right wing propaganda, where is the "liberal bias"?
CNN, Politico, and the majority ABC, CBS, NBC local tv affiliates are owned by right wingers. Is anybody really going to claim that the right wingers who own these media outlets are going to promote a "liberal news bias" against their own interests? :D
-
Today on MSNBC, Chuck Todd was using the same right wing talking points that you hear on Faux. Chris Christie is getting a pro documentary series of himself on CNN to boost his political aspirations. On the ABC Evening News last night, the Infrastructure Bill wasn't even the lead story. CNN waited an entire hour to mention it during CNN prime time. So where is this "liberal bias" in the main stream media?
CNN and MSNBC still spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and the January 6th investigations. I don't think most rightwingers and independents care about the January 6th hearings as much as Democrats.
The Infrastructure Bill is a great policy win for Biden but he's got to go out and sell it himself to voters. Policy-stuff in DC doesn't drive ratings or get clicks so the news media isn't going to spend much time discussing the Bill.
Do you think the hosts at Faux actually believe all the COVID and vaccine lies they push when they themselves are vaccinated? Of course not. They need to gin up controversy and keep the sheep angry so they keep tuning in. It's entertainment and not news. And we all suffer because of it.
True but controversy and anger sells on the Left too.
NPR and C-Span do great work but they don't have as big an audience as the major news networks because they do straight news without the focus on contentious wedge issues and other political drama.
CNN, Politico, and the majority ABC, CBS, NBC local tv affiliates are owned by right wingers. Is anybody really going to claim that the right wingers who own these media outlets are going to promote a "liberal news bias" against their own interests? :D
Well we agree that there's no real "Liberal/Progressive" outlet in the mainstream media. While I maintain that most who work in the media are politically Liberal, the on-air content is not driven by stuff that advances Liberal or Democratic political agendas.
-
CNN and MSNBC still spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and the January 6th investigations. I don't think most rightwingers and independents care about the January 6th hearings as much as Democrats.
They're supposed to report on a major domestic terrorist attack and coup attempt against the United States along with the anti American traitors behind it. That's real news that needs to be reported, not bogus right wing propaganda against Vice President Harris that CNN has been pushing. Independents do care about what happens to our democracy which Republicans are trying to replace with fascism. Republicans obviously don't care because that's what they want with Criminal Donald as their dictator. MAGA was trying to overthrow the US Government so it could happen. The right wing media constantly downplays the entire event and supports the terrorists involved in the coup.
Reporting on the 1/6 insurrection isn't a "liberal bias". That's a domestic terrorist attack by MAGA and it needs to be reported as a major event on every media outlet.
The Infrastructure Bill is a great policy win for Biden but he's got to go out and sell it himself to voters. Policy-stuff in DC doesn't drive ratings or get clicks so the news media isn't going to spend much time discussing the Bill.
President Biden is selling it to the voters. He was in New Hampshire today and will continue to go across the United States just like he's was doing for months when he was trying to get the bill passed. But when networks run Rittenhouse as the lead story over an historic Infrastructure accomplishment that no other President achieved of this magnitude, then nobody can claim a "liberal bias" when it's not the top story of the day. When Criminal Donald was in charge, the top story was of him making empty promises of infrastructure we never got. So he got the coverage while doing nothing, and when President Biden accomplished an historic goal, it's not even the 1st story of the night. There can't be a "liberal bias" when President Biden's Infrastructure Bill passage receives less coverage than Criminal Donald lying at a hate rally about his imagnary infrastructure plan he never even had.
Chris Christie was on ABC yesterday. He was on CNN and MSNBC tonight. The New York Times just did a big interview with him today. He has his own pro documentary airing on CNN. What's their fascination with him? Seems like they are trying to repair his damaged image for a potential 2024 Presidential run. That's the same thing the media did for Donald Trump before he ran for office. These networks should be interviewing President Biden for his historic Infrastructure Bill. So, the President takes a backseat for a Trump stooge and some people still want to claim there's a "liberal media bias". What a joke.
True but controversy and anger sells on the Left too.
Yes, which is why the MSM goes negative against Democrats and the current Democratic President at the time to get people on the left angry enough to tune in to drive up their ratings. It's all a ratings game. We've seen that with both CNN and MSNBC in the last few months with their biased coverage against President Biden and Democrats. Bill Mahr who's a self professed "liberal" is now pushing right wing talking points on his HBO show to get ratings. If the main stream media was so "liberally biased", there would never be one bad word spoken against Democrats like we see the pro Trump and GOP propaganda being pushed on Faux, Newsmax etc.
Who is always mostly booked on the major network Sunday morning shows? It's not Democrats or Biden Administration officials, it's right wing Republicans in Congress pushing their lies and talking points. And not one of the hosts ever pushes back against it. So, that right wing propaganda seeps into the main stream media and people who do watch the programs might be inclined to believe it. Then other outlets report on those lies. That's how right wing disinformation gets spread in the media. The only person who does a decent job of pushing back is Chris Wallace on Faux which is a surprise.
NPR and C-Span do great work but they don't have as big an audience as the major news networks because they do straight news without the focus on contentious wedge issues and other political drama.
Yes, they do but their coverage is limited and the rest of the media should be the same without the propaganda. Except CSPAN still airs Criminal Donald's recent hate rallies which shouldn't even be broadcasted.
Well we agree that there's no real "Liberal/Progressive" outlet in the mainstream media. While I maintain that most who work in the media are politically Liberal, the on-air content is not driven by stuff that advances Liberal or Democratic political agendas.
Yes, there in no "Liberal Media" in which right wingers continue to lie about each day.
When right wingers are buying up independent media outlets they aren't going to keep liberals on their staff. They are going to bring in right wingers who think just like them. And what a person's private political preference is doesn't matter, when the boss hands them a script of right wing talking points to say on the air they are going to say it or else they will lose their job.
It most definitely is driven by political agenda. After the buyout of CNN and Politico, the news on there has slanted right because the right wingers who owns them wants a right slanted content.
When Sinclair Broadcasting buys up NBC, ABC, CBS tv affiliates they push far right wing propaganda into their local 4,5,6,11pm news broadcasts. That's politically driven right wing agenda being pushed into local media markets all over America. And that's more far right wing than Faux.
So yes, it is politically driven because the right wingers that own these media outlets want their right wing agenda broadcasted. That's why they are buying up everything so more right wing disinformation can be pushed on people. They sure as hell aren't going to be pushing "liberal news" on people. :D
-
CNN and MSNBC still spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and the January 6th investigations. I don't think most rightwingers and independents care about the January 6th hearings as much as Democrats.
The Infrastructure Bill is a great policy win for Biden but he's got to go out and sell it himself to voters. Policy-stuff in DC doesn't drive ratings or get clicks so the news media isn't going to spend much time discussing the Bill.
And by "spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and January 6th" you mean run that almost continuously. No one can question that CNN and MSNBC are biased to the point of being a propaganda arm of the DNC obsessed with Trump and fearful of 2024.
-
And by "spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and January 6th" you mean run that almost continuously. No one can question that CNN and MSNBC are biased to the point of being a propaganda arm of the DNC obsessed with Trump and fearful of 2024.
Almost all of cable news is worthless. It's all "team" reporting. CNN used to be the least bad; but they've gone full Trump resistance and with that anything goes. The media critic for the Washington Post, Erik Wemple, asked the network about retracting some of their Trump collusion claims, specifically those in the Steele Dossier. They refused to respond.
MSNBC is the worst, Fox second worst, CNN third worst. But all are serving the country poorly.
-
Almost all of cable news is worthless. It's all "team" reporting. CNN used to be the least bad; but they've gone full Trump resistance and with that anything goes. The media critic for the Washington Post, Erik Wemple, asked the network about retracting some of their Trump collusion claims, specifically those in the Steele Dossier. They refused to respond.
MSNBC is the worst, Fox second worst, CNN third worst. But all are serving the country poorly.
Yes, I agree. The news media used to report the news story and let the viewers form their own opinions. Now they are mostly designed to influence the opinion of viewers. They selectively decide which stories to run and instead of reporting the facts, they provide endless commentary of the events. The distinction between Fox and the liberal outlets, is that Fox does at least exercise some independent judgment on the viewpoints they promote. Fox does not automatically promote every position of the Republican party. In fact, in many instances they are downright antagonistic to establishment republicans. Agree with their opinions or not, it's often more of a populist perspective. CNN and MSNBC, however, are a complete tool of the DNC. You can often see that when they start using the exact same buzz words as the Dem politicians. Their stories and messages are coordinated directly with the DNC and Dem politicians to promote the desired narrative. It is basically a state-operated propaganda network like something from Communist China or the old USSR. And the laundry list of debunked conspiracy theories they promoted, including most notoriously the "Russian collusion" theory, that they ran with for years demonstrates that they have no concern for the truth. They will be sued again after this Rittenhouse trial concludes for promoting another fake narrative. Biden will also be sued for his defamatory remarks.
-
And by "spend an awful lot of time talking about Trump and January 6th" you mean run that almost continuously. No one can question that CNN and MSNBC are biased to the point of being a propaganda arm of the DNC obsessed with Trump and fearful of 2024.
:D :D :D
Once again this is absolutely false. AT&T owns CNN who also funded right wing pro Trump OAN. CNN has been pushing right wing talking points for months in order to boost their sagging ratings. Criminal Donald is under criminal investigations in 3 states plus he incited an insurrection attempting to steal an election he didn't win, so of course news outlets are going to report on it. It's the right wing media that dismisses it pushing their lies and propaganda instead. CNN is currently airing a pro Chris Christie propaganda documentary in prime time which is helping to promote him politically. You don't see CNN doing this currently for any Democrat. President Biden's historic Infrastructure Bill wasn't even mentioned in the first hour of CNN prime time and you're falsely claiming CNN is "an arm of the DNC". "Fearful of 2024" LOL. Trump lost by over 7 million votes and is even less popular today. He is on his way to being indicted for criminal election fraud in Georgia and finance fraud in New York.
How AT&T helped build far-right One America News
One America News, the far-right network whose fortunes and viewership rose amid the triumph and tumult of the Trump administration, has flourished with support from a surprising source: AT&T Inc, the world's largest communications company.
A Reuters review of court records shows the role AT&T played in creating and funding OAN, a network that continues to spread conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and the COVID-19 pandemic.
OAN founder and chief executive Robert Herring Sr has testified that the inspiration to launch OAN in 2013 came from AT&T executives.
Dallas-based AT&T, a mobile-phone and Internet provider, also owns entertainment giant Warner Media, which includes CNN and HBO. AT&T acquired DirecTV in 2015 and in August spun off the satellite service, retaining a 70% share in the new, independently managed company. AT&T’s total U.S. television subscriber base, including satellite and streaming services, fell from 26 million in 2015 to 15.4 million as of August.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-oneamerica-att/
Yes, I agree. The news media used to report the news story and let the viewers form their own opinions. Now they are mostly designed to influence the opinion of viewers. They selectively decide which stories to run and instead of reporting the facts, they provide endless commentary of the events. The distinction between Fox and the liberal outlets, is that Fox does at least exercise some independent judgment on the viewpoints they promote. Fox does not automatically promote every position of the Republican party. In fact, in many instances they are downright antagonistic to establishment republicans. Agree with their opinions or not, it's often more of a populist perspective. CNN and MSNBC, however, are a complete tool of the DNC. You can often see that when they start using the exact same buzz words as the Dem politicians. Their stories and messages are coordinated directly with the DNC and Dem politicians to promote the desired narrative. It is basically a state-operated propaganda network like something from Communist China or the old USSR. And the laundry list of debunked conspiracy theories they promoted, including most notoriously the "Russian collusion" theory, that they ran with for years demonstrates that they have no concern for the truth. They will be sued again after this Rittenhouse trial concludes for promoting another fake narrative. Biden will also be sued for his defamatory remarks.
More nonsense and projection. Faux Propaganda is a pro Trump network and Sean Hannity was basically a Trump adviser. Ex Trump stooges all got jobs at the network. The only person at the network who has any credibility is Chris Wallace. The rest of them push pro Trump talking points and lied about COVID-19 right out of the gate. Now they graduated to lying about the vaccine which is why the sheep who watch won't get vaccinated. Name one host at any network who has access to President Biden like Hannity had to Trump? The answer is 0. Faux decided to push the imaginary "critical race theory" using that buzzword to anger old white right wingers to keep them tuned in. No surprise that the GOP is pushing this same nonsense as well. So RNC propaganda is being pushed by all the right wing media outlets.
Fox News' Sean Hannity 'Basically Has a Desk' at White House As President's Most Influential Counselor: Trump Adviser
https://www.newsweek.com/sean-hannity-white-house-desk-counselor-donald-trump-1457917
And even more nonsense. There was Russian collusion but Criminal Donald covered it up. The Senate Intelligence Committee issued a Bipartisan report confirming Russian collusion but you continue to ignore it. Also, last July Russia admitted they were actively helping Trump. And why was criminal Paul Manafort giving Trump internal polling data to the Russians? Also, every criminal in the Trump administration has ties to the Russians. Rudy was taking dirty Russian money and got raided by the FBI. The GOP takes illegal Russian money for their campaigns. Lots of Russian collusion below.
U.S. Senate report goes beyond Mueller to lay bare Trump campaign's Russia links
Bipartisan intelligence panel says that Russian who worked on Trump’s 2016 bid was career spy, amid a stunning range of contacts
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/18/donald-trump-us-senate-report-russia-campaign
US intelligence warned House members Russia is working to get Trump re-elected – reports
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/20/russian-interference-2020-house-warned
Kremlin papers appear to show Putin’s plot to put Trump in White House
Exclusive: Documents suggest Russia launched secret multi-agency effort to interfere in US democracy
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house
US says Russia was given Trump campaign polling data in 2016
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-paul-manafort-russia-campaigns-konstantin-kilimnik-d2fdefdb37077e28eba135e21fce6ebf
All of Trump’s Russia Ties, in 7 Charts
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868/
GOP Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia
A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html
Giuliani, Parnas and 'Russian Money': The Other Scandal Rocking Trump World
U.S. prosecutors claim Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas concealed information about his finances, including a $1 million payment he had received from an account in Russia in September
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/giuliani-parnas-and-russian-money-the-other-scandal-rocking-trump-world-1.8293470
How Putin's oligarchs funneled millions into GOP campaigns
Campaign finance reports show troubling connections between a group of wealthy donors with ties to Russia and their political contributions to Trump and top Republican leaders
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/05/08/how-putin-s-oligarchs-funneled-millions-into-gop-campaigns/
-
Tell me how there is a "liberal media bias" when the media is owned and bought up by the far right pushing pro Trump right wing propaganda all over America on local NBC, ABC, CBS 4,5,6,11pm news broadcasts owned by Sinclair Broadcasting that reaches 72% of the country.
Pro-Trump Sinclair Media Poised for National Expansion by 2020
April 23, 2019
Sinclair Broadcasting Group is the largest owner of local television news stations in the United States. It currently airs original programming on 193 channels throughout the country, enough to reach 39 percent of all American homes.
The company is also owned by a longtime Republican donor, and proudly operates as a platform for conservative propaganda. Sinclair formally promised to provide favorable coverage to Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign (in exchange for access to the GOP nominee). Since the mogul’s election, the media giant has ordered all of its affiliates to air commentary that advances White House talking points, and coerced their own anchors into personally reporting that the mainstream news media is biased against the president.
Given the warm relations between Sinclair and the Trump administration, many observers expected the FCC to rubber-stamp the broadcaster’s proposed purchase of Tribune media last year — a merger that would have enabled Sinclair to broadcast local news to 72 percent of American households. But then Sinclair tried to subvert the lenient ownership rules that the administration had set for it, and, in a rare outburst scrupulous governance, FCC chair Ajit Pai flagged the issue, and the deal ended up falling through.
But Sinclair never gave up on its dreams of expansion. Earlier this year, it launched an ad-free streaming channel called STIRR that aims to deliver local TV news and other entertainment to cord-cutters coast to coast. The broadcaster proceeded to stock up on the best damaged-goods conservatives cable news had to offer — hiring former Fox News anchors Eric Bolling and James Rosen (both of whom left Fox amid allegations of sexual harassment), along with Sebastian Gorka and former CBS News anchor Lara Logan. These heavyweights will ostensibly produce conservative agit-prop for syndication on Sinclair’s local news channels and STIRR. Meanwhile, Sinclair also bought itself a piece of YES, the New York Yankees broadcast network, and is currently the top bidder for a package of regional sports networks that the Walt Disney Company is auctioning off.
It is unclear whether Sinclair will force regional baseball announcers to deliver “terrorism alerts” between batters. But even if the broadcaster leaves its sports stations well enough alone, those stations should still provide Sinclair with a healthy source of revenue for funding its propaganda operations; Wall Street analysts are bullish on SBG’s stock.
And that’s probably bad news for Democrats. It is hard to overstate how much the conservative movement has benefited from its associated billionaires’ investments in mass media. A 2017 study from researchers at Emory and Stanford estimated that Fox News increased the Republican Party’s share of the two-party vote in 2004 and 2008 by 3.59 and 6.34 percentage points respectively. Just this month, a study using the same methodology found that counties where Fox News has a low channel number (and thus, slightly higher viewership) tend to have more conservative fiscal policies as a result.
If liberal billionaires like Tom Steyer want to get more bang for their political bucks, they should consider taking a note from Rupert Murdoch and friends: Buying up media outlets and then sprinkling ideological propaganda into their regular programming is an effective way to influence political outcomes while turning a profit!
If the left had a better class of ideological billionaires, “Here’s How Republicans Are Trying to Poison Your Children to Please Their Corporate Overlords This Week” segments would already be a staple of local TV news.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/sinclair-broadcast-group-national-expansion-2020-sports-networks.html
This is Sinclair, 'the most dangerous US company you've never heard of'
Sinclair is the largest broadcast company in America. But its partisan politics – and connections to the White House – are raising concerns
August 17, 2017
Most Americans don’t know it exists. Primetime US news refers to it as an “under-the-radar company”. Unlike Fox News and Rupert Murdoch, virtually no one outside of business circles could name its CEO. And yet, Sinclair Media Group is the owner of the largest number of TV stations in America.
“Sinclair’s probably the most dangerous company most people have never heard of,” said Michael Copps, the George W Bush-appointed former chairman of Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the top US broadcast regulator.
John Oliver – host of HBO’s weekly satirical show Last Week Tonight – used a similar line when he introduced an 18-minute segment on Sinclair last month by referring to it as “maybe the most influential media company you never heard of”.
But that is beginning to change. Sinclair’s size, rightwing politics and close connections to Donald Trump’s White House are starting to attract attention. Democrats are wading in to the fray and demanding answers over Sinclair’s close ties to the Trump administration, which, they say, could mean the group is getting preferential treatment.
The New York Times refers to the group as a “conservative giant” that, since the Bush presidency, has used its 173 television stations “to advance a mostly right-leaning agenda”. The Washington Post describes it as a “company with a long history of favoring conservative causes and candidates on its stations’ newscasts”.
More recently, Sinclair has added a website, Circa, to its portfolio. But not any old website. Circa has been described as “the new Breitbart” and a favorite among White House aides who wish to platform news to a friendly source (a process otherwise known as “leaking”). As the US news site the Root put it: “What if Breitbart and Fox News had a couple of babies? What if they grew up to be a cool, slicker version of their parents and started becoming more powerful? Meet Sinclair and Circa –Donald Trump’s new besties.”
The growing anxiety in America over the rise of Sinclair stems from the belief the company’s close connections to Trump have allowed it to skirt market regulations. Already the biggest broadcaster in the country, Sinclair is poised to make its biggest move yet. If the FCC approves Sinclair’s $3.9bn purchase of an additional 42 stations, it would reach into the homes of almost three-quarters of Americans.
Another cause for concern, and increased scrutiny, is what’s seen as the company’s pronounced political agenda. Sinclair forces its local stations to run pro-Trump “news” segments. In April, they hired Boris Epshteyn, a former Trump campaign spokesman and member of the White House press office, as its chief political analyst. His “must-run” 10-minute political commentary segments unsurprisingly hewed closely to the Trump administration’s message. The news and analysis website Slate, referring to Epshteyn’s contributions, said: “As far as propaganda goes, this is pure, industrial-strength stuff."
But Sinclair’s politics isn’t restricted to Epshteyn’s contributions. It has a long history of airing material which has often been controversial, and for which it has been sanctioned in the past – all the while purporting to simply report the “news”.
While it doesn’t have the cultural cachet of major conservative networks like Fox News, Sinclair’s influence is more subtle. Unlike Fox News, which brands itself clearly and proudly, most viewers of Sinclair’s local stations have no idea who owns them since they are not branded as part of the Sinclair network.
But it is their intended purchase of a collection of new stations owned by Tribune Media – the former owners of the illustrious Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times – that has thrust them into the national spotlight unlike ever before.
“It used to be a few years ago there were some mergers that were unthinkable,” Copps, now with the DC-based watchdog group Common Cause, told the Guardian. “We’re in a period now when everything’s so wild that nothing is unthinkable.”
For the Trump administration, Sinclair has obvious appeal
The figure that looms large behind Sinclair is David Smith, whose father founded the company in the Nixon era. Smith recently ended his 28-year reign as CEO, and along with his brothers maintains what an industry publication called “iron-clad control” of the billion-dollar media empire as well as the company’s majority financial interest.
The Smith family, based in and around Baltimore, likes to keep a low profile – they give few interviews and David Smith has no Wikipedia page. “We would tend to maintain as much anonymity as we can,” he told the Baltimore Sun in 1995, one of the rare times he’s spoken to the press.
Their political agenda is somewhat less mysterious. Campaign finance records show the Smith brothers have historically donated overwhelmingly to Republicans. And a Washington Post analysis of the company’s 2016 presidential election coverage found Sinclair stations were unusually favorable towards Trump and negative towards Hillary Clinton.
During last year’s presidential campaign, Sinclair conducted zero interviews with Clinton. But it touted 15 “exclusive” ones with Trump, which aired mostly in critical swing states in the final months of the election and without any commentary, despite the copious fact-checking Trump interviews tend to require. Sinclair has insisted it had no special arrangement with the Trump campaign and that Clinton simply did not make herself available to them. Clinton campaign officials say they spurned Sinclair for a reason, though her vice-presidential nominee, Tim Kaine, gave a handful interviews to Sinclair stations.
According to Politico, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner told a room full of Manhattan business executives that the campaign had struck a deal with Sinclair to secure better coverage in the states where they needed spots most.
The manner in which Sinclair looks set to expand – specifically, with Trump paving the way – is causing widespread anxiety throughout media and political circles. The focus of the concern is Ajit Pai, the man Trump appointed as head of the country’s top broadcasting regulator, the FCC.
Since he began work in January, Pai has been busy relaxing the protections for local broadcasting that had previously limited Sinclair’s expansion.
Trump’s new-look FCC has moved swiftly to clear the hurdles for Sinclair’s proposed takeover of Tribune. A day before Trump was inaugurated, Smith invited Pai to a meeting at the Washington-area headquarters of the company’s ABC affiliate. Within 10 days of taking over the FCC, a New York Times investigation found, Pai had already relaxed a restriction on TV stations’ sharing of resources, including ad revenue – precisely the topic Smith had met with Pai about.
Since January, the Times report found, “Pai has undertaken a deregulatory blitz enacting or proposing a wishlist of fundamental policy changes advocated by Mr Smith and his company.”
Tom Wheeler, Pai’s predecessor at the FCC, who is now at the Brookings Institution, said: “What’s surprising is how fast the Trump FCC moved and how they moved without any real opportunity for public comment and without any following of procedural due process ... So you look at that kind of behavior and scratch your head.”
To better understand such behavior and where it’s leading, it helps to consider where Sinclair began.
David Smith’s father, Julian Sinclair Smith, described by the company’s official history as “patriarch to the Smith brothers”, founded the company in 1971, and kept a hand in the business until his death, following a battle with Parkinson’s, in 1993. But the company’s greatest evolutionary changes began around 1990, when the brothers bought up the remainder of their parents’ stock, kicking off an extended buying spree that would last decades.
As Sinclair grew, so did the scrutiny. And increasingly, the Smith brothers found themselves not just the broadcasters, but the subject of the news.
In 1996, David Smith was arrested on suspicion of soliciting a prostitute who performed what the police called “unnatural and per**rted s*x on him” in a Mercedes owned by Sinclair. More disturbing to critics than the misdemeanor s*x offense, though, was the unusual way he got out of doing the court-ordered community service that resulted from his plea bargain in the case: by having his broadcasting company do what amounted to publicity hits for local drug counseling programs, packaged as news.
LuAnne Canipe, a former reporter for Sinclair, said the incident was also indicative of a broader culture of office sexism. “Let’s just say the arrest of the CEO was part of a sexual atmosphere that trickled down to different levels in the company,” said Canipe, who left Sinclair in 1998. “There was an improper work environment. I think that because of what he did, there was a feeling that everything was fair game.”
One person concerned by Sinclair’s growth: Rupert Murdoch
The growth of Sinclair may have passed below the radar, but not past another media mogul – Rupert Murdoch, chairman and acting CEO of Fox News.
Although Sinclair has insisted it has no interest in competing with national cable news platforms like Murdoch’s, industry observers say the mogul is already planning a strategy to combat the rise of a potential rival. After a failed attempt to outbid Sinclair for Tribune, Murdoch is threatening a switch of Fox’s broadcast affiliates from Sinclair-owned stations to those of a smaller independent broadcaster.
But it isn’t just Sinclair’s business interests that are a cause of creeping concern – its political affiliations could be, too.
Take the case the former congressman Bob Ehrlich, a Maryland Republican who later become governor. After pressing the FCC to fast-track Sinclair’s request to acquire more stations, Ehrlich enjoyed company perks like the frequent use of a Sinclair executive’s luxury helicopter, as the Baltimore Sun reported in 2002. By the time full details of the report emerged, Ehrlich had already won his gubernatorial election.
In 2004, Sinclair leadership reportedly ordered its local affiliate stations to air a documentary critical of the Democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry, based on allegations which later proved unfounded – that Kerry had exaggerated his record as a swift-boat officer in the Vietnam war.
A Washington DC bureau chief publicly resisted and was fired for the offense. The incident sent ripples through its stations, but Sinclair said media reports about the controversy exaggerated the issue.
Around the same time, as George W Bush faced criticism over the faltering war in Iraq, Sinclair ordered seven of its stations not to run an episode of Nightline in which host Ted Koppel read the names of every American soldier killed in the war, saying it “undermine[d] the efforts of the United States in Iraq”. The decision sparked a major backlash, including from the Republican senator John McCain, a Vietnam war veteran, who wrote a letter to David Smith calling the decision “unpatriotic” and “a gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces”. Other times, Sinclair’s influence has been more ambiguous. When the Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs by the then US congressional candidate Greg Gianforte on the eve of his election in Montana, the local NBC affiliate, recently purchased by Sinclair, refused to air Jacobs’s audio recording of the incident, despite entreaties from NBC executives in New York. The local news director said she was not influenced by Sinclair, noting the purchase was not yet complete. Gianforte won the election, and, the day after the Montana Republican was charged with assault, Sinclair’s vice-president and director Fred Smith donated $1,000 to him.
Meanwhile, with its 2015 purchase of Circa, a mobile aggregated news app, Sinclair has control for the first time of a national text-based news outlet. Backed by a staff of 70, Sinclair transformed the app into conservative-leaning platform offering thinly sourced scoops – often written without any author byline other than “Circa staff” – that frequently seem to advance the Trump administration’s agenda du jour. Trump and his aides have returned the favor by linking to Circa’s content, and it’s become a favorite source of Sean Hannity, Fox News’s most obsequious Trump booster. (Sinclair denies Circa has any political orientation, noting that it does not carry op-eds.)
The rise of Sinclair has also recently stirred the Democrats in Washington, who have become increasingly vocal on the issue.
This summer, Senator Maria Cantwell led a group of colleagues in urging commerce and judiciary leaders to carefully examine the pending deal with Tribune, citing concern “about the level of media concentration this merger creates, and its impact on the public interest”, according to the lawmakers’ June letter.
And this week, House Democrats in top FCC oversight positions wrote directly to the FCC’s Pai expressing their dismay at what they perceive to be a “pattern” of preferential treatment toward Sinclair.
In addition to changes paving the way for Sinclair’s merger, Pai’s FCC has proposed eliminating one of its most fundamental rules, which requires local news stations to actually have a local studio where they broadcast the news. Now, the agency seems poised to do away with local broadcast protections, which would allow Sinclair and other broadcasters to save money by cutting local staff and to impose more editorial input from corporate headquarters.
And that means many more Americans will be hearing from the most dangerous company most people have never heard of – whether they know it or not.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/aug/17/sinclair-news-media-fox-trump-white-house-circa-breitbart-news
-
Sinclair Broadcasting Co. is right wing fake news. Where in America is there a broadcasting company that forces local tv news anchors to read a liberal news script? Once again, there isn't any. But Sinclair forces local tv news anchors to read right wing fake news scripts all over America. So much for the "liberal media bias". It doesn't exist. Right wing propaganda at it's finest.
Sinclair Made Dozens of Local News Anchors Recite the Same Script
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/business/media/sinclair-news-anchors-script.html
How America's Largest Local TV Owner Turned Its News Anchors Into Soldiers In Trump's War On The Media
CNN's Brian Stelter broke the news that Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner or operator of nearly 200 television stations in the U.S., would be forcing its news anchors to record a promo about “the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country.” The script, which parrots Donald Trump’s oft-declarations of developments negative to his presidency as “fake news,” brought upheaval to newsrooms already dismayed with Sinclair’s consistent interference to bring right-wing propaganda to local television broadcasts.
You might remember Sinclair from its having been featured on John Oliver’s Last Week Tonight last year, or from its requiring in 2004 of affiliates to air anti-John Kerry propaganda, or perhaps because it’s your own local affiliate running inflammatory “Terrorism Alerts” or required editorials from former Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn, he of the famed Holocaust Remembrance Day statement that failed to mention Jewish people. (Sinclair also owns Ring of Honor wrestling, Tennis magazine, and the Tennis Channel.)
The net result of the company’s current mandate is dozens upon dozens of local news anchors looking like hostages in proof-of-life videos, trying their hardest to spit out words attacking the industry they’d chosen as a life vocation.
Not that any of it matters to Sinclair, which, with the help of a friendly federal government, is about to swallow up another 40 television stations—increasing its reach and its lead over competitors like Hearst and Scripps. The script, as transcribed by ThinkProgress based on the KOMO (Seattle) version, reads:
Hi, I’m (A) ____________, and I’m (B) _________________…
(B) Our greatest responsibility is to serve our Northwest communities. We are extremely proud of the quality, balanced journalism that KOMO News produces.
(A) But we’re concerned about the troubling trend of irresponsible, one sided news stories plaguing our country. The sharing of biased and false news has become all too common on social media.
(B) More alarming, some media outlets publish these same fake stories… stories that just aren’t true, without checking facts first.
(A) Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control ‘exactly what people think’…This is extremely dangerous to a democracy.
(B) At KOMO it’s our responsibility to pursue and report the truth. We understand Truth is neither politically ‘left nor right.’ Our commitment to factual reporting is the foundation of our credibility, now more than ever.
(A) But we are human and sometimes our reporting might fall short. If you believe our coverage is unfair please reach out to us by going to KOMOnews.com and clicking on CONTENT CONCERNS. We value your comments. We will respond back to you.
(B) We work very hard to seek the truth and strive to be fair, balanced and factual… We consider it our honor, our privilege to responsibly deliver the news every day.
(A) Thank you for watching and we appreciate your feedback.
https://deadspin.com/how-americas-largest-local-tv-owner-turned-its-news-anc-1824233490
-
Better late than never. CNN is finally coming clean on the fake Russia collusion story that they ran with for four years:
A series of investigations and lawsuits have discredited many of its central allegations and exposed the unreliability of Steele's sources. They also raise serious questions about the political underpinnings of some key explosive claims about Trump by shedding new light on the involvement of some well-connected Democrats in the dossier, and separate efforts to prod the FBI to investigate ties between Trump's campaign and Russia.
-
Better late than never. CNN is finally coming clean on the fake Russia collusion story that they ran with for four years:
A series of investigations and lawsuits have discredited many of its central allegations and exposed the unreliability of Steele's sources. They also raise serious questions about the political underpinnings of some key explosive claims about Trump by shedding new light on the involvement of some well-connected Democrats in the dossier, and separate efforts to prod the FBI to investigate ties between Trump's campaign and Russia.
:D :D :D
How is it "fake" when our U.S. Intelligence documented Russian collusion? Are you calling them liars Mr. Smith? Even the Kremlin admitted it.
Once again, documented evidence Mr. Smith that Criminal Donald covered up.
U.S. Senate report goes beyond Mueller to lay bare Trump campaign's Russia links: Bipartisan intelligence panel says that Russian who worked on Trump’s 2016 bid was career spy, amid a stunning range of contacts
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/18/donald-trump-us-senate-report-russia-campaign
U.S. intelligence warned House members Russia is working to get Trump re-elected – reports
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/feb/20/russian-interference-2020-house-warned
Kremlin papers appear to show Putin’s plot to put Trump in White House: Exclusive Documents suggest Russia launched secret multi-agency effort to interfere in US democracy
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/15/kremlin-papers-appear-to-show-putins-plot-to-put-trump-in-white-house
U.S. says Russia was given Trump campaign polling data in 2016
https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-paul-manafort-russia-campaigns-konstantin-kilimnik-d2fdefdb37077e28eba135e21fce6ebf
All of Trump’s Russia Ties, in 7 Charts
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868/
GOP Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia: A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html
-
It was easier for the government to manipulate and control the Press when there were fewer options for national and world news.
The internet, social media, and smartphones have democratized the Press and weakened the power of gatekeepers in the news media.
While yes, it's true that there is much "fake news" and disinfo in alternative and new media, it's also true that there's "Fake news" and disinfo in traditional media.
Look at the infamous Steele Dossier for example which has been exposed as having been rooted in political opposition research. Several national news media outlets initially treated the Steele Dossier as legitimate raw intelligence on Trump and his associates. Four years later we now know that it was disinformation. That's just one example of many where the Press promoted false narratives or disinformation. The Iraq WMDs controversy is another major example.
I could go on but I don't have the time to list every false narrative or inaccurate story that originated from the national Press.
The distrust that Americans have in the news media exists because it's easier to see through the hidden agendas and false narratives today...
Maybe you, "now know that it was disinformation." but that "Trumpy" conclusion enjoys no consensus.
Peter Strzok is doing you a favor you won't appreciate, pointing out that you've bought into, and are spreading, an inaccurate conclusion.
https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/transcript-rachel-maddow-show-11-4-21-n1283316
(11-04-21)
STRZOK: I agree with you. I think I`m certainly concerned when I read these indictments, both Mr. Sussman`s and Mr. Danchenko`s. His indictment is 39 pages long. If you go through those 39 pages and pull out the facts that are relevant to the statements he`s allegedly made to the FBI, that`s a much smaller subset. That`s a smaller subset of the 39 pages.
Or whether intentionally or not, when you look at the balance of those pages, they have several dog whistles to these kind of pro-Trump conspiracy theories. Statements like the FBI`s investigation of the Trump campaign relied on certain things. Well, there was never an FBI investigation of the Trump campaign unless you listen to some kind of far extreme right commentators or folks in Congress who assert that there was, but that`s nonsense.
The indictment makes a point to note that the FBI was unable to corroborate Steele`s reporting. At the same time it neglects to mention that we weren`t able to disprove it either. As you look through there, these subtle one- sided portrayals of the facts that lay down a narrative that plays into the sort of prior assertions by President Trump, by the prior administration, by his enablers in Congress and the media that this is all somehow nonsense.
That can`t be -- that can`t be unintentional in my opinion and it is concerning. I think it`s seeking to lay out a false narrative about the entire effort of what the FBI and special counsel Mueller did.."
https://www.emptywheel.net/2021/11/15/john-durham-destroying-the-purported-victims-to-save-them/
November 15, 2021
"...Finally, since Durham claims that Danchenko’s lies impeded the FBI’s efforts to vet the dossier, Danchenko will need to be provided a great deal of information on those efforts. This is another instance where files released as part of Trump’s efforts to undermine the investigation will help Danchenko prove there are discoverable materials he should get. This spreadsheet is what FBI used to vet the dossier. It shows that the FBI obtained information under the Carter Page FISA they used to vet a claim Danchenko sourced to his friend, Galkina, whom Durham made central to questions of materiality. Similarly, the FBI used information from the Page FISA to help vet the claim that Danchenko sourced (incorrectly or not) to Millian, which is utterly central to the case against him. Given Durham’s claims that Danchenko’s lies prevented FBI from doing this vetting, he can easily claim that obtaining this vetting information may be helpful and material to his defense (though it may in fact not be helpful).
This is a very long list and I’m not saying that Danchenko will succeed in getting this information, much less using it at trial.
What I’m saying is that it is quite literally unprecedented for a defendant to know specific details of two FISA orders — the 702 directive targeting Galkina and the Carter Page FISAs — that they can make credible arguments they need access to to mount a defense. Similarly, the ongoing, sensitive counterintelligence investigation into Oleg Deripaska (and Konstantin Kilimnik) is central to the background of the dossier. And Durham has made someone who — like Danchenko before him, was investigated as a potential Russian asset — a fact witness in this case.
Normally, prosecutors might look at the discovery challenges such legitimate defense demands would pose and decide not to try the case (it’s one likely reason, for example, why David Petraeus got away with a wrist-slap for sharing code-word information with his mistress, because the discovery to actually prosecute him would have done more damage than the conviction was worth; similarly, the secrecy of some evidence Mueller accessed likely drove some of his declination decisions). But Durham didn’t do so. He has committed himself to deal with some of the most sensitive discovery ever provided, and to do so with a foreign national defendant, all in pursuit of five not very well-argued false statements charges. That doesn’t mean Danchenko will get the evidence. But it means Durham is now stuck dealing with unprecedented discovery challenges..."
-
More fake news at Faux with hack propagandist Tucker Carlson. Yet millions of people tune in to be lied to each night. Faux and the right wing media see these people as easy marks so they use them as suckers to get high ratings so they can make huge profits. That's what it's all about. But the right wing media is destroying our democracy with these horrible lies and constant gaslighting. This isn't "news" it's far right wing propaganda.
'That was the last straw': Two conservative Fox News 'mainstays' quit over Tucker Carlson’s Jan. 6 lie
(https://www.rawstory.com/media-library/tucker-carlson-sends-a-dangerous-signal-to-trump-as-the-right-wing-normalizes-abject-criminality.jpg?id=28013546&width=980&height=527)
At Fox News, far-right opinion host Tucker Carlson has not only been a supporter of Hungarian strongman Viktor Orbán and promoted the racist, anti-Semitic Great Replacement theory — he has also been an apologist for the insurrectionists who violently assaulted the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6 in the hope of stopping Congress from certifying now-President Joe Biden's Electoral College victory over then-President Donald Trump. And Carlson's coverage of January 6 is so beyond the pale that two conservative journalists, according to National Public Radio, have left Fox News because of it.
Those conservatives, NPR's David Folkenflik reports, are Jonah Goldberg and Stephen Hayes. Goldberg is known his years as a National Review editor. And Hayes was with the now-defunct Weekly Standard, whose Bill Kristol started The Bulwark with fellow Never Trump conservative Charlie Sykes following the Standard's demise.
"Two long-time conservative Fox News commentators have resigned in protest of what they call a pattern of incendiary and fabricated claims by the network's opinion hosts in support of former President Donald Trump. In separate interviews with NPR, Stephen Hayes and Jonah Goldberg pointed to a breaking point earlier this month: network star Tucker Carlson's three-part series on the January 6 siege of the U.S. Capitol that relied on fabrications and conspiracy theories to exonerate the Trump supporters who participated in the attack."
Goldberg and Hayes, Folkenflik notes, became "mainstays" of Bret Baier's "Special Report" when Fox News hired them in 2009. And together, Goldberg and Hayes started the conservative website The Dispatch.
Goldberg, interviewed by NPR, said of "Patriot Purge," Carlson's three-part series, "It's basically saying that the Biden regime is coming after half the country, and this is the War on Terror 2.0. It traffics in all manner of innuendo and conspiracy theories that I think legitimately could lead to violence. That, for me and for Steve, was the last straw."
Speaking to NPR, Hayes was vehemently critical of Fox News for airing promotional videos for Carlson's "Patriot Purge" series.
"I thought it was irresponsible to put that out into the public airwaves," Hayes told NPR. "The trailer (for the series) basically gave people the impression that the U.S. government was coming after all patriots — half of the country, in the word of one of the protagonists in the piece. And that the federal government was going to be using the tools and tactics that it used to go after Al-Qaida. And that's not happening. That's not true."
Hayes continued, "It's a narrative that's contradicted by certainly the vast collection of legal documents charging those who participated in January 6, the broad reporting by a wide variety of news outlets on what happened on January 6 then and in the time since — and contradicted in part by Fox News' own news site and the reporting that people on the news side have done."
Goldberg also told NPR, "Being a Fox contributor is kind of a brass ring in conservative and right-wing circles, and I was well-compensated. I'm not looking to be a martyr or ask for pity or any of that kind of stuff. But it's a significant financial hit, for sure. And it's also cutting yourself off from a very large audience. We don't regret the decision, but we found it regrettable that we had to make the decision."
https://www.rawstory.com/that-was-the-last-straw-two-conservative-fox-news-mainstays-quit-over-tucker-carlsons-jan-6-lies/
-
Fake News is Old News.
Lately, Trump supporters are arguing that the main stream news media, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, are covering up or ignoring the plain evidence, that the 2020 Presidential Election was stolen from Trump. A huge subset of the overall Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy, this one involving thousands of reporters. And, not just domestic outfits, but overseas ones like the BBC and Reuters.
But having we heard something similar before? Ah, yes, the Kennedy assassination. The media covering this up. Cronkite, Huntley, Brinkley, Rather and a host of others. JFK CTers, like Trump CTers, have no problem in readily accepting news media as being a Large-Secret-Conspiracy by itself. And being just a subset of the overall larger conspiracy. Yes, JFK CTers never used the term “Fake News”. But they follow the same concept.
The truth is, the 1930’s through the 1980’s was a golden era in American reporting. In previous generations, it was pretty bad. Very partisan. Not dedicated to going after the truth. But over a couple of generations, it was very good quality.
What caused it to go downhill? Well, with only 3 main competitors, there was no room for going for a special niche. It made more sense for all three, CBS, NBC and ABC to pursue the truth and try to out compete each other.
But, with the more cable options available, it makes financial sense to specialize in going after a target audience, like Fox News, Newsmax and OAN do. Walter Cronkite used to end his broadcast with “And that’s the way it is”. Tucker Carlson should end his with “And that’s all just what you wanted to hear”.
And so, millions of Americans get biased and even obviously false news on TV. Yes, good options are available, like the BBC. But too many turn to a bad option. Forty years ago, the available quality of the news was much better.
We all knew it, and it was revealed by the January 6th House Committee this evening. Faux Propaganda hosts had direct access to the White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. What other media outlet has their on air personalities having direct access to the President's Chief of Staff to coordinate nightly talking points? None.
Hannity and Ingraham had Meadows' personal and private cell phone number. On January 6th 2021, not only were they privately begging Meadows to have Trump publicly call off the riots and violence, they then went on the air to tell their viewers it was BLM and Antifa instead of Trump's MAGA thugs who were involved in the insurrection. Not only that, they kept broadcasting that same lie every night and their sheep viewers believe it to this very day.
They LIED. Just like they do every single night about COVID.
Faux Propaganda is State run TV and nothing more. This is the fake news. And these hacks will say nothing on the air about privately begging Meadows to their viewers. This political hack network needs to lose their broadcasting license.
Fox News Hosts, Don Jr. Pleaded With Mark Meadows to Get Trump to Call Off Insurrection: Jan. 6 Committee
“Can [Trump] make a statement? Ask people to leave the Capitol,” Sean Hannity texted the then-White House chief of staff
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/fox-news-hosts-text-meadows-trump-jan-6-1271163/
-
The truth is, the 1930’s through the 1980’s was a golden era in American reporting. In previous generations, it was pretty bad. Very partisan. Not dedicated to going after the truth. But over a couple of generations, it was very good quality.
What caused it to go downhill? Well, with only 3 main competitors, there was no room for going for a special niche. It made more sense for all three, CBS, NBC and ABC to pursue the truth and try to out compete each other.
Then how did they ever manage to keep the president's sexual escapades a secret?
-
Then how did they ever manage to keep the president's sexual escapades a secret?
Because people who live in glass houses just simply shouldn't :D