Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Media, "we'll do all the talking"

I'm getting sick and tired of being linked to articles that have cut off comments. That's horse shit.

The thing is they know full well the public is in no mood for their nonsense, their partial reporting, their whitewashing, and their ridiculous hagiographies that purposefully leave out more than they include.

They know commenters will deliver the same smackdown they did in the voting booths and they're not of the mind to comprehend what just now happened to them, nor why. Yet they continue to deliver their crap by the bucketload.

And Drudge is among the worst. Why does he imagine his readers are interested in what these people have to say anymore? They've all been discredited, and hard, it just hasn't sunk in yet the extent of the damage they've done. They've cashed in all of their chips, and lost, now they're out. Permanently.

Thankfully they still provide their email so you can write them directly and tell them how full of shit that they are.

10 comments:

rhhardin said...

The media are for the media's audience, whose eyeballs they sell to advertisers.

That audience likes those narratives.

Nobody else does but the audience is big enough to pay the bills.

The best you can do is ruin the media's reputation so it's taken as the soap opera it is, instead of something about journalism and truth that everybody learned in school.

rhhardin said...

Maybe hacking emails of politicians can be constitutionally protected, so as to get at what's going on.

Of course there will start being press releases put into emails then, so you really can't win.

AprilApple said...

DAvid Harsanyi sez:

"A melodramatic Van Jones is free to claim that Trump’s victory is a “white-lash.” But ever since Barack Obama’s unprecedented passage of Obamacare, his party has lost more than a thousand seats nationally in three wave elections. From 2010, the electorate demanded Washington share power, but the president didn’t listen, relying on executive power, the bureaucracy, and judiciary to pass agenda items without consensus or compromise. A couple of weeks ago I asked, “When Will Liberals Answer For Obamacare’s Failures?” Today, apparently.

In all their vast coverage of agitated right-wingers, it may have escaped the attention of many in the media that over the past eight years the Democratic Party has moved dramatically to the left on an array of issues. It’s now a party of cultural imperialists and economic technocrats who want to rule through fiat. It is a party more comfortable coercing Americans who see the world differently than in convincing them. It is a movement propelled by a liberal punditry that’s stopped debating and resorted to smearing millions they disagree with."

AprilApple said...

"Perhaps Obama might be capable of governing this way and remaining popular, but his political talents aren’t transferable. Not to congressional or Senate Democrats, who have been paying dearly for his policies. And certainly not to Hillary. Democrats nominated a corrupt candidate with abysmal political instincts, a decades’ long habit of mendacity, and a dearth of new ideas.

It’s worth remembering that every time a media figure or liberal grumbled about how terrible the 2016 presidential election was, they meant Trump was terrible. The Democratic Party establishment never entertained any other nominee seriously, and the liberal punditry never earnestly lamented Hillary’s inadequacies. There was never any question that all the money, power, and infrastructure of the Left would mobilize behind Hillary.

The media never treated Clinton as an atypical candidate, although she was in so many ways. No matter how often she lied or much we learned about her racketeering or her malleable positions on foreign policy and everything else, her defenders could claim that there was no moral equivalency between her and Trump."

AprilApple said...

"...Democrats nominated one of the least trusted people to ever run for the presidency. According to the final Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll, Americans trusted Hillary six points less than they did Trump, whose absurdities and outright fabrications probably came off as straight talk to millions of Americans sick of hearing manicured talking points. An Associated Press-GfK poll also found that 92 percent of Americans thought Clinton’s email setup either broke the law or was in “poor judgment.” Only 6 percent believed she did nothing wrong. This poll was taken months before the freakout over the James Comey letter. Rather than dealing with this reality, Democrats and their allies attempted to normalize her corruption.

Trump might also have been the beneficiary of decades of vacuous liberal attacks on Republican candidates who, as you know, are always racist, homophobic, transphobic xenophobes because they have different ideas about society or policy. Voters might be becoming increasingly immune to these histrionics. Yet, as soon as it became apparent that Trump would win, liberal commentators began blaming bigotry again. The Left has become so saturated in identity politics, it can’t imagine that anything else might drive a voter.
"

AprilApple said...

"As my colleague Sean Davis has noted, though, seven states that voted for Obama twice voted for Trump in 2016. Did all these Americans suddenly become racist in a few years time?

Beltway types, and I include myself in this objectionable group, take everything politicians say seriously and literally, because we sort of have to. There is value in parsing policy, ideology, and rhetoric, but it has limited significance in a non-political world. Voters don’t care if every utterance is factcheckable when they have intuition and experience to guide them. They are far less horrified by every gaffe than the average reporter is. "

AprilApple said...

...
"None of the Trump voters who surrounded me — most of whom I’d consider moderate Republicans — argued that the GOP nominee was exemplary person or an optimal candidate for the presidency. Their support had nothing to do with white patriarchal supremacy or any of the ugly themes that preoccupy the progressive Left (and now the entire Democratic Party).

Certainly none of these voters cared for the reasons I was opposing a Trump presidency, either — which, broadly speaking, would be the preservation of constitutional process and the expansion of free trade. The consensus solidified around one thought: Hillary was worse. A lot worse. She was corrupt, power hungry, and a would-be dictator who needed to be kept out of the White House."

edutcher said...

The media's been talking for 50 years.

20 years ago, the Internet came along and people could talk back.

That was where the election began.

rcocean said...

"It’s worth remembering that every time a media figure or liberal grumbled about how terrible the 2016 presidential election was, they meant Trump was terrible. The Democratic Party establishment never entertained any other nominee seriously, and the liberal punditry never earnestly lamented Hillary’s inadequacies. There was never any question that all the money, power, and infrastructure of the Left would mobilize behind Hillary."

Great point. That's the scary thing about liberals and the MSM, they will NEVER criticize "their side", unless its for being too soft on the "enemy". No matter how corrupt, awful, phony, or just plain dumb Hillary was, they protected her. If we ever get some crazy nut President who blows up the world or brings us fascism, it will be a Democrat, who the MSM refuses to vet or criticize.

AJ Lynch said...

Chip- oftentimes I have found the commenters know way more about an issue than the typicall;y dumb journalist who wrote the story especially when it is a local news story.