2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumA Politico reporter confesses that the media have a set of prejudicial rules
they follow when reporting on Hillary. I am listing headings for the rules he enumerates, but not including his explanation of each rule, to avoid quoting more than is permissible.
Updated by Jonathan Allen on September 3, 2016, 9:34 a.m. ET jon@vox.com
1) Everything, no matter how ludicrous-sounding, is worthy of a full investigation by federal agencies, Congress, the "vast right-wing conspiracy," and mainstream media outlets.
2) Every allegation, no matter how ludicrous, is believable until it can be proven completely and utterly false. And even then, it keeps a life of its own in the conservative media world.
3) The media assumes that Clinton is acting in bad faith until there's hard evidence otherwise.
4) Everything is newsworthy because the Clintons are the equivalent of America's royal family.
5) Everything she does is fake and calculated for maximum political benefit.
Read the entire (very good and revealing) article at
http://www.vox.com/2015/7/6/8900143/hillary-clinton-reporting-rules
NOTE: This is a repost of a comment I posted on another thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2396437
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)This shit most of HRC knows. The corporate media sucks.
GP6971
(31,168 posts)Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)there is no such thing as a Independent unbiased Media any more. When the Labor Newspapers shut down,that was the vestige of true news reporting.
Response to tblue37 (Original post)
MichiganVote This message was self-deleted by its author.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Hillary is strong!
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... widely read place. It's so good to hear someone say the truth!
niyad
(113,344 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Unfortunately, it appears 40% (at least) of the country doesn't have one.
niyad
(113,344 posts)I wish this would go viral.
Ford_Prefect
(7,901 posts)This would seem to imply that almost nothing the Mainstream press has to say about HRC is true or worthy of the degree of apparent skepticism their coverage so often seems to embody.
If true it would go a long way to explain why they appear to treat anything Trump has to say as important, meaningful political insight and comment, don't you think?
Overseas
(12,121 posts)again.
How different it would be if they just covered DJT's latest hate speech and then HRC's campaign speeches about policy issues>
Instead it's like Oh Gee, if I say DJT bad, I've gotta trot out the old email again (and ignore millions of GOP official email deletions).
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)their lives and the lives of their family might be in danger if Trump gets in..
I mean this is serious shit.. Trump is out of his mind..
and theres a good chance when and if he faces an international crisis,
hell pull a trigger..
tblue37
(65,408 posts)make a big enough splash or if they at least continue to do their (corporate) masters' bidding.
They get money, fame, and status, for now. Like impulsive children, they can't think beyond the gratification of the moment to the long term consequences of their bad behavior.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)and probably true.. But dont ya think they would think about their kids?
tblue37
(65,408 posts)they can get right now, and they convince themselves that they are really doing it for their kids, since all that money and status provides such lovely benefits "for their kids" (though mainly they want that money and status and all those benefits for themselves).
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)they can't think past right now and dont care at all about the kind of damage Trump can do to their children..
tblue37
(65,408 posts)that it is only short term gain, but people who are able look beyond the near future and to consider the consequences of bad behavior in the present don't put at risk the kinds of things a Trump presidency would put at risk.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)Sad! But the problem is that their fucking up our world as well. Our Children, our friends and our own lives..
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Let's say that your average Media journalist does realize Trump is bad for the country.
WHY. SHOULD. THEY. CARE...
They are rich and privileged, and they know no towing the line is the fastest way to lose that privilege. If the country goes to hell, as many on both the left and right really want it to do, they are ensured that they could enjoy the fruits of every nation by virtue of money.
DURHAM D
(32,610 posts)the trustworthy question she should say -
More than 80% of Americans don't trust you, the media. What are you doing about it?
Perhaps if you started treating me more fairly you could regain some of their trust.
TuxedoKat
(3,818 posts)They've pretty much been doing this since she started running last year.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)a similar to a recent piece by Jon Favreau, but yes.
Il_Coniglietto
(373 posts)Between the downright despicable treatment of Hillary Clinton as the first woman president to the national embarrassment/walking abomination that is Donald Trump, this election cycle will probably be studied for a long while.
If there's any justice, history won't be kind in its account of the media's complicity. I hope that's not a big "if."
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)MSM made immune to Clinton scandals years ago .