The Media did not REPORT the News. They MANUFACTURED IT.

[LaydeeBug]

and they are on our airwaves sowing Russian propaganda. They shrug their shoulders like they've done nothing wrong.

Stop rewarding them by watching their programming.

They are lying to you. They can't blame 'fake news'. It's their JOB to discern from the two. They haven't. They don't pursue truth or facts, they pursue celebrity.

Just *think* about all the free air time they gave to Soviet Donald. *Think* about all the Russian propaganda they reported so they could make this a dog race, and thus get more ratings.

Let that sink in a minute.

another. just another minute.

Do you *think* they're going to tell the truth **NOW**? It's a successful business model if you put up with that. It's not going to get fixed if it fucking *works* on you. How many people have "liberal media" ingrained in their psyche? Seriously. Just think about how 'liberal media' is taken for granted in our American vernacular.

They have been imposing that double standard so that they can have it both ways for YEARS now. It distorts where the middle is when they get to have it both ways.

This is a coup. Our media failed us. We relied on them, and they lied to us. In fact, they re-lied to us. Again and again. Do you expect them to start being honest now?

The only reason you are hearing anything about Russian this or that is because the same media now needs another fucking horse race so they can get ratings. They need another scandal to distract us from their smoke and mirrors. It's like, "Squirrel!!!" (popular culture reference)

Regardless of whether they ever utter another word about this or not, a coup was orchestrated against the United States of America. And it feels like Patriots are being held hostage to decorum, and it's *strange*.

But when the right is embracing RUSSIANS before their own fellow Americans, THEY are the fucking *problem*...not us.

And I don't give a flying rat's ass about their feelings, or their reasons. I don't need to understand the motives of traitors.

Even Benedict Arnold has a story...

I just need to fight against it. And THAT means speaking out all the time. Because this is only going to happen through the coffee shops, and the streets, and the activism...the media is OWNED by THEM. That proverbial THEM broadcasts that THEY are US, and we've allowed that fucking narrative to get framed.

As the Lorax said, in this topsy turvy bullshit we are now in: "I have sighted the enemy. It is US"

Do NOT let them off the hook for subjugating the USA to Russia. This isn't right/left. This is traitor/patriot.

[Shandris]

1. I told everyone the Medes have always been illusionists.

What, did you think they repealed the propaganda part of the 'Things you are not supposed to do on American soil" because they wanted to give you truth?

Of course, that does beg the question of "Why would they do it and then only after a coup let it be used against us?" And if you're asking that question, well, I would simply wonder what makes you think they waited at all, other than "I NEED for this to be true!".

[LaydeeBug]

2. I am not sure I understand the

'repealed the propaganda part of the 'Things you are not supposed to do on American soil" because they wanted to give you truth?'

[Shandris]

20. I'm sorry, that does seem a bit unclear doesn't it.

There were things our government was (technically, although it never actually mattered) not allowed to do. Among those was use mil-type propaganda on US Citizens. That was repealed.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130715/11210223804/anti-propaganda-ban-repealed-freeing-state-dept-to-direct-its-broadcasting-arm-american-citizens.shtml

I'm unaware of anything that replaced it (although I am always amenable to new information if someone has some!). So that leads us to a question: Do you really think they repealed that...in order to tell us the truth? And that's what that jumble at the beginning was supposed to be.

[TomCADem]

13. Donald Trump Goes on Twitter Rampage Against Corrupt, Dishonest Media

So, Donald Trump was telling the truth?

http://www.thewrap.com/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-dishonest-media-new-york-times-twitter-rampage/

Donald Trump stepped up his attack on the media Sunday with a series of tweets accusing the press of protecting Hillary Clinton, writing false stories about him, and even bias coverage of this rallies.

“I am not only fighting Crooked Hillary, I am fighting the dishonest and corrupt media and her government protection process,” Trump wrote. “People get it!”

He followed up shortly after with, “It is not ‘freedom of the press’ when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it is completely false!”

Trump repeatedly called the New York Times “failing” during the series of tweets, and wasn’t shy about his opinion that the media is covering for Clinton. He sent eight anti-media tweets in a 24-hour period, typically slipping in a Clinton jab in addition to the assault on press.

[Blanks]

3. They'll bring down Trump the same way...

And for the same reason: ratings.

We will begin to see it on the evening news. Time magazine has an article that lays out the connections between Trump and the Russians.

The evening news will start reporting these connections until they've got everyone waiting for the next shoe to drop.

It isn't that the media favored Trump all that much. Honestly, I don't believe they have the influence over people that social media does, it's that it will be more dramatic to bring out in the months to come.

The connections between the Trumps and the hackers has been evident for months. The Trumps are in debt to the hackers.

But in the end, it's all about the drama. They couldn't have gotten near the long term drama with a Hillary victory. I expect they've known that since Trump won the primaries.

[JCanete]

4. Hear Hear...now you've got the right focus!!!!!

I quibble with the ratings point though...not that the media doesn't love a horse race...but the advertising money comes in for the kind of reporting that is AND ISN'T done. And the corporate ownership is also a huge factor, since those mega-corps also have vested interest in the coverage and the mindset of the populace. So, arguably, I don't call this a coup so much as Corporate influence doing business as usual...its just that corporate interests are so trans-national, they couldn't give less of a shit whether or not our election gets influenced by a foreign government, or whether or not our commons get sold out from under us to foreign corps or interests either...so long as they themselves continue to amass wealth and power.


totally right about the manufacture of "liberal media" as well, by the media I might add.

[LaydeeBug]

7. Les Moonves even said something lie, "It's bad for America, but good for CBS"

seriously.

[Cha]

5. Like they have been since I started watching in 1999 but I stopped

in Nov 2002.

[HoneyBadger]

6. Megyn Kelly turned down $100M to move to NBC

Last edited Sat Jan 7, 2017, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Let's say that she is getting $90M. Where does that money come from? Ad revenue during her show, based on her viewership and some key words. In an election year, where does ad revenue on a political show come from? Political ads.

If you want politicians to buy more ads, they have to believe that they need to. Meaning they have to be in a close race.

This has been the case since dinosaurs roamed the earth.

And news stations have been hyping neck and neck political races since then.

That is the game and the only reason that Megyn gets the big bucks.

[LaydeeBug]

9. Strawman alert.

This has NOT been the case since the dawn of time. Their used to be a Fairness Doctrine.

You're welcome.

[dae]

16. Yes, and St. Ronnie got rid of that inconvenience.

[LaydeeBug]

18. He certainly did. Pretending "it's *ALWAYS* been this way is pure folly.

Sometimes you have to tell the fucking truth

[dae]

19. I'm with you LaydeeBug but I'm not sure if 🤗 Donald Littlehands

is on board.

[LaydeeBug]

25. He's only on board with his Russian overlords. nt

[malaise]

8. Clearly you have not read Chomsky

[LuckyLib]

10. Exactly. "They need another scandal to distract us from their smoke and mirrors."

We have been pawned, and sold a bill of goods!

[TomCADem]

11. Poll: Facebook No. 1 source of political news for millennials

Well, I guess it is a good thing that most millenials actually get their news from facebook?

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/243611-poll-facebook-most-common-source-of-political-news-for-millennials

Facebook is the most common source of political news for millennials, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center.

Sixty-one percent of millennials, defined as adults between 18 and 33 years old, told researchers they got political news from Facebook in the previous week. CNN is the second most common source for the group, which is coveted by advertisers, with 44 percent saying they'd turned to it in the last week.

That means millennials are about as reliant on Facebook for news about politics and government as baby boomers are on local television, according to the report.
Millennials also use Google News at higher rates than other generations.

Google News and BuzzFeed were the only two news sources that millennials are more aware of than members of Generation X or baby boomers.

[HoneyBadger]

12. It used to be The Daily Show

Which of course is not a news show. I used to go to the taping of the show, and just like a standup comedy club, they warmed up the audience with another comic for 15 minutes. But it was more of a news show than Colbert, which Jon Stewart described as a character rendered in 3D. Colbert was not as smooth as Jon and he would run through the same routine 4-5 times to get it right, then edit it for broadcast. Jon pretty much did about twice what actually made it to tv. Anyhow, this was what millennials believed was news. Which amused the heck out of Jon.

[HoneyBadger]

14. Media exists to drive advertising, which is what keeps the lights on at NBC

This point of view document was prepared by Marcus Thomas Director of Planning Services Tim Wild, Strategic Planner Stefanie Riediger and Partner, Media & Connections Planning Raphael Rivilla.
Media, particularly television media, has long been a critical tool used in presidential election campaigns. However, in the past decade, the U.S. has seen significant changes in how media is used for politics. Election campaigns are adopting digital and social platforms, targeting constituents more specifically, and spending larger media budgets than ever before. In addition, the federal government guarantees candidates’ airtime within election windows that cannot be pre-empted, and for the lowest unit rates available. Unfortunately, for commercial brands, this creates havoc, making it very difficult to continue advertising as usual. With a presidential election (and a Summer Olympics) coming in 2016, brands must challenge themselves to rethink and refine their media strategy for the year.
The state of political advertising
There are two key periods in an election cycle certain to impact media planning. These windows begin 45 days prior to the primaries (occurring January 2016 to June 2016; tentative dates by state are located here), and 60 days prior to the general election (September 7, 2016 to November 8, 2016). These windows are the only times presidential candidate campaigns are legally permitted to advertise.
However, in 2010, the “Citizens United” ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court protected corporate and union funding of political advertising under the First Amendment, giving rise to Super PACs (Political Action Committees). While Super PACs are not guaranteed the same right to airtime or the lowest rates like presidential candidates, they are free to advertise in support of a candidate outside of these election windows, and have extremely deep pockets.
The impact on media
Within election windows, particularly in the two to three weeks prior to the election, political advertising takes over available airtime. Regional and local vendors across the nation reported 50-90% saturation in 2012. Plus, if there are time slots that are not pre-empted by political ads, the cost to run a branded spot can jump 10-200%.
This supply and demand issue in combination with the rise of Super PACs led 2012 to be a record spending year for political advertising – spending upwards of $9 billion total and $3.1 billion in television media alone. The 2016 presidential election is predicted to be the most expensive in history, possibly with $4 billion in television advertising alone.
The addition of Super PAC advertising also means that political spending is starting earlier and spreading through more months of the year than previously allowed. According to Advertising Expenditure Forecasts, some analysts are predicting that “2016 political spend could start as early as Q4 2015” and in some key markets, the amount of political dollars being spent outside of the 2012 political windows has been 3 times more than expected.
While 2008 saw the introduction of social and digital political advertising, 2012 made it a line item. And in 2016 that line item number is expected to grow. In fact, Facebook now offers political support as part of its service offering, which means that advertisers can add higher CPPs and CPMs to sold-out digital video spots. According to AdWeek, “Digital ad spending is unquestionably enormous, but local TV spots are still where the real influence is."
Advertising price increases on social sites, which is a large paid traffic source for most political advertisers, could push presidential candidates and Super PACs into spending more on search engine marketing, especially on the Yahoo-Bing network, where the cost per click remains lower for many keywords.
“The CPC to run social ads on Facebook rose 180% from the start to the end of Q1 2015. It's reflective in Facebook's fourth quarter 2014 earnings report, reporting revenues in the U.S. up 54% sequentially”, as reported by MediaPost’s Data Insider. TechCrunch notes that revenue per advertiser in the U.S. grew 24% during the same time period, suggesting brands paid more.
The political media force is expected to fire on all cylinders for 2016, raising the ante with a concentrated presence again. Plus, the Summer Olympics will take over the conversation August 5-21. What does that mean for a brand? Revisit and revise media tactic while building upon your CRM, owned, and earned channels. Brands must be proactive, leverage a variety of communications channels, and be ready to pivot.
Implications
For seasonal brands, this presents additional challenges. The following are guidelines Marcus Thomas approach planning for 2016:
Be mindful of election windows.
If at all possible, avoid television media during the specified election windows and one week after the general presidential election. As such media spending should shift to before August and mid-November or later.
If television media is required, at minimum avoid the two to three weeks before the election, when availability and costs will be at their worst. Also, political advertising favors broadcast, so consider cable television options as a way to proceed.
Avoid “battleground” states when at all possible. The degree of political advertising pressure is largely determined by the state’s battleground status. In 2012, these states included Florida (29 electoral votes), Pennsylvania (20), Ohio (18), Michigan (16), North Carolina (15), Virginia (13), Minnesota (10), Wisconsin (10), Colorado (9), Iowa (6), New Mexico (5) and New Hampshire (4).
Consider alternative dayparts. Political advertising tends to take over Prime Time News, Access and Early Fringe dayparts.
Plan and buy early.
In addition to “locking-in” key flight dates and cheaper rates, schedules placed further out will be the last ones to be bumped for political ads.
Stay in close, collaborative contact with media representatives to ensure that opportunities are capitalized on and adjustments made more fluidly.
Thinking ahead offers greater flexibility (substitutions, upgrades, makegoods, etc.)
Be nimble. Expect changes and be ready to react sensibly with a plan B.
Political advertising targets can change weekly depending on poll results and changing strategies. Keep a diligent eye on available opportunities as they arise.
Expect to pay an additional 7-15% across the board, possibly more in some circumstances
Consider alternatives.
Relying on one advertising medium during an election is a critical mistake – especially if that medium is television.
Spend smarter. While consumer media habits include more mobile, online and social media to get news now, political advertising is still primarily focused on traditional channels. Leverage more targeted approaches within these channels.
Digital, radio, search, social media and events are all still valid media, but may require some increased costs.
Build and leverage your owned audiences.
This includes email, direct mail, cookies from your website, and social followers.
The cost to message your owned audiences can be free based on the channel you use.
Consider funding and running campaigns specifically geared towards building these audiences, now up to the election rate increase periods we have outlined above.
Work with your PR and Social Media teams to create editorial calendars that can be run during the election windows where media costs may be too cost prohibitive to run. Include mechanisms for sharing the content to ensure your content drives additional earned impressions.
If you have not invested in a CRM platform or do not have a CRM contact strategy and editorial calendar, now is the time to start leveraging this channel. Mirroring your social and PR social calendar can make sense here.
Tag your sites strategically to make sure you are collecting and harvesting all the traffic. This will allow you to build your cookie database for re-marketing efforts. Re-marketing efforts with social sharing mechanisms can allow you to drive additional “free” impressions during this expensive, and highly competitive media environment.

[hadEnuf]

15. The new narrative is not so much Russia hacking our election

but instead it's "here's what liberals and Democrats did to make everybody hate them and vote for Trump".

[LaydeeBug]

17. because they are MANUFACTURING the news...they certainly don't want culpability for it. nt

[hadEnuf]

21. Yes and it also keeps the show going.

Trump and his cabinet of cartoon characters will help to supply the media with all of the fake news and spin that they can broadcast.

[hadEnuf]

22. Trump is a goldmine for the corporate media

[rpape]

23. The business party

The business party controls most everything your senses consume. Labeled masters of mankind, oligarchs, the 1%...doesn't matter.
A small group of decision makers determine the script, send narratives down capitalist mountain and the avalanche overtakes all of us.

Any Russian meddling is worthy of consideration and retaliation, but pales in comparison to the work of interstate cross check.
1000s of stories about vague Russian hacking while the actual criminals remain hidden. Why are democrats not pushing this hideous voter suppression that literally cost us the election? Could it be the illusion of two parties? Maybe the business party won.
Show Americans something shiny (Trump tweet, Russians, shootings, and they'll look away) Confuse them with the fictional, yet conceivable voter fraud threat and the work of cross check seems important. Greg Palast laid out the plan and correctly predicted the results in October..yet no one cares.
The blind trust most americans have in truth, honesty, checks & balances, elections, government, patriotism etc is the tool most used against us. Skepticism is un-american. Question the mainstream and you are a conspiracy theorist.

Turn off the noise. Find trusted sources (Thom Hartmann, Matt Tiabbi) and spread the word. We are being lied to.

[Igel]

24. The point is still missed.

What from the Wikileaks dump was a lie? What was false?

That's the problem. It wasn't false. If it had been about the RNC we'd have been all over it. As it was, many were all over it. The folk behind the report released Friday probably didn't check every single letter, but they said that as far as they could tell none of the email info was falsified.

It was "true fake news." The only thing fake was ... Well, nothing. If we had a proper sense of perspective, if we didn't like scandals, if we didn't relish the kinds of data that moles, whistleblowers, and hackers dump through places like Wikileaks then there'd have been no "hack" (which is a horrible metaphor, if you ask me).

There was false info, to be sure. The Vermont electrical company wasn't hacked. Some of the IP addresses listed as originating hacks were IP addresses that were dynamically assigned. Today, a hacker would be using them; tomorrow, it's the IP address for checking email. Which is what the Vermont "hack" was--an employee checked email and the IP address used was on the "hacker" list. In other words, there were two falsities there--first, that the IP addresses were always those of hackers; second, that the electrical grid in Vermont had been hacked. Why the mistakes? Because we're so busy being paranoid.

Then there was the hacker listed in the joint intelligence report which The Guardian did a story on and who claims to not be in bed with the Russian government. But they needed to name names. So there's a third bit of actual fake news.

Do you mean Lorax or Pogo?

[Hoyt]

26. Sadly I agree -- Exactly what was false? Also, giving Trump airtime should have sunk him.

Christ, anyone watching and hour or two of Trump could tell he's racist, misogynistic, a buffoon, a tool, and worse. No one needed a newscaster to tell them that, it was right in front of them. They voted for him anyway. Blame the voters.

There should not have been anything to hack that would hurt us. From everything I've seen, there were not votes changed. If enough were tampered with, then that's a different story. Gerrymandering, voter IDs and other suppression have been going on for years. So, how do we say this election needs to be overturned. It would be nice, but it's not going to happen. Trump is Prez and even if Congress were to impeach him, we'd still end up with someone just as bad. Now it's time to concentrate on 2018 and 2020.

[rpape]

27. No one understands the depth of voter supression

Inform the masses, if for no other reason than to wake folks up in 2018,2020. Saying suppression has been going on for years is totally unacceptable, and the apathy and ignorance towards the subject is a result of the story's suppression.

Less Russian coverage. More Palast coverage. More Crosscheck disecting.

[riverbendviewgal]

28. I am not interested in American news on TV or radio.

Since the election I have not watched any American news or listed on Sirius. I see the election as rigged. It is a fraud. I lived in the USA when I was a kid. I read the Eichmann trial. Studied WW2. My American US history teacher said the country would implode after 250 years from corruption. He was so right on. I see WW3 coming. PUTIN IS Hitler, Trump is Mussolini. My opinion anyway.
I have disowned my American family because they are white supremists.
It looks like I will never set foot in the the USA again. The guns, the racism, the danger of infrastructure falling apart. It is too expensive for my Canadian dollar. I am spending my holiday dollars in Canada, the Caribbean and Europe .

I am so sad for you all . I remember hiding under my desk in school during air raids, in case Russia attacks the country. Well, now Trump has opened the gates and let the barbarians in. Frightening.

[LaydeeBug]

29. spot on

[treestar]

30. Why did that history teacher think that?

I figure you are about my age as I recall the bomb drills too!

[riverbendviewgal]

32. He studied civilizations

He was young. This was in themid 60s.

[LaydeeBug]

31. Never let these motherfuckers forget