Media already criticizing Trump's foreign trip.

[iceberg]

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

Bias, opinion, certainly.
.

that's my issue w/CNN. a vast majority of their headlines are TRUMP SUCKS DOO DOO and follow up later paragraphs of "well maybe, if he did". type articles. they take what he does and push it for max negative effect.

if you want me to believe something trump does is evil and needs to be stopped, they need to stop saying that about everything he says and does. and when your headlines are opinions, the article becomes one also - to me anyway.

and CNN has moved to being a buttload of opinion pieces.

The media has simply dropped all pretense, period.

It's not going to change, so Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.
.

ok - i think we agree. still learning who's who and trying to read to understand in here so if i misfire - pre-apologies.

when i read emotional statements in "news" articles, i stop anymore. it then moves to an opinion piece and i don't care how many "facts" they lace in there to prop their opinions as "Unbiased" - which they simply are not.

i minored in journalism. i worked my way through college as a small town writer / photographer. at one point i said something to the effect of people not caring about higher insurance premiums cause they love their convertible and i was told that was a no no. i need a quote. i need facts to support my opinion.

that standard is gone. it kills me 90% of the "news" is busy trying to get my approval of how they feel about a story, or busy telling me how to feel. not their job but i can go to CNN now and find 4-5 "news" pieces that will contain emotional links and "leading" all through it.

at that point i simply don't care what *facts* you lob in - its an opinion piece.

Yeah, I was in the business for 18 years, and where it is now just horrifies me. It already leaned Left, but the flood of "news" (cough) outlets spawned by the internet has just completely destroyed the profession. And that's not a good thing in a democratic republic.
.

yea, people no longer look for news. they look for sites that support how they feel and call it news.

since CNN and other media outlets make their money off this - they cater to it. once you've done that - kinda game over. you sold out and can't be trusted as unbiased news.

they don't care and that's the danger.

 

[iceberg]

Are you going to answer my question?
.

Which part of the article do you think is not accurate? Point out the inaccurate part.

He's not making about point about whether the specific claims are accurate. He's observing, rightly, that the piece uses a lot of "loaded" terms, too many and some too puerile for the article to be seen as a pure news piece, that create a tone.

To Mac1958's credit, he's among the handful of members here who's shown enough integrity in his remarks so that his remarks about and critiques deriving from tone have merit in their own right. The vast majority of members here only understand things like tone and intent when it suits their rhetorical objectives to do so. Mac does not seem that way. That's not to say I'm saying he's right or wrong, but only that by his well presented ideas he's bought himself, with me at least, enough credibility that I'll fairly consider what he has to say rather than write him off as being merely a member of the "peanut gallery"/"echo chamber."

The facts of the article don't put Trump in a good light. Big deal. Are you saying every unflattering fact MUST be balanced by something flattering? I can see the articles now

"Drunken Junkie Kills Busload of Orphans and Nuns, but He Kept His Lawn Mowed Regularly"

Is that what you and he are demanding?

Are you saying every unflattering fact MUST be balanced by something flattering?

Though I cannot speak for Mac, in my own assessment of whether a piece of journalism is news or commentary, unflattering facts must be presented neutrally. For instance, the story's headline could have been presented in a wide variety of ways that are neutral, that is to say without declaring it a disaster, which is a qualitative conclusion rather than a neutral telling of a story. Two easy ways to have done so are the following:

• Trump's first foreign trip encounters setbacks before it has started.
• Scope of Trump's first foreign trip curtailed before commencing

One'll notice that the first alternative is essentially the message of the first sentence in the piece and specific details presented in the piece corroborate the assessment that some of the changes to the initially planned agenda for the trip are indeed setbacks. They may not be the biggest setbacks that could have or may happen, but setbacks they are.

Odd that so many competent and objective editors don't always make the exact choices that you would make. Do you think that is odd?

i don't think you and i would agree on the definition of "competent" at this point.

 

[L.K.Eder]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

 

[L.K.Eder]

What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump?

• Trump had planned to make a speech atop Masada. Those plans are no more mainly because Trump has refused to take the cable car trip to the plateau's top and make the speech.
• Trump has noted he doesn't want to take the trip.
• His aides are distraught over the risk that Trump will go "off script." (That's so domestically too and has been every since the 2016 campaign.)
• Do you deny that Israel's "local media was reporting complicated logistical details including only 15 minutes allotted for Trump's visit to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Remembrance Museum in Jerusalem?
• Do you deny that Mrs. Trump will accompany him on the trip?
• Do you deny Miller's having a track record of anti-Muslim sentiment and rhetoric?

I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information.

15 minutes for yad vashem. wow. awesome.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The facts of the article don't put Trump in a good light. Big deal. Are you saying every unflattering fact MUST be balanced by something flattering? I can see the articles now

"Drunken Junkie Kills Busload of Orphans and Nuns, but He Kept His Lawn Mowed Regularly"

Is that what you and he are demanding?

I'll ask again, then I'll just give up:

Is this a reporting-based, fact-based news article, or is it an opinion piece?
.

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

Bias, opinion, certainly.
.

that's my issue w/CNN. a vast majority of their headlines are TRUMP SUCKS DOO DOO and follow up later paragraphs of "well maybe, if he did". type articles. they take what he does and push it for max negative effect.

if you want me to believe something trump does is evil and needs to be stopped, they need to stop saying that about everything he says and does. and when your headlines are opinions, the article becomes one also - to me anyway.

and CNN has moved to being a buttload of opinion pieces.

The media has simply dropped all pretense, period.

It's not going to change, so Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.
.

Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.

Really, it's readers who need to do something, and the "something" they need to do is develop the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not. The the rubric article for this thread has several pieces of information in it; it's just the style in which they are presented that makes the piece editorial.

Trump can quite easily "deal with it" (1) by simply not blundering and blathering like a stark raving madman multiple times a day, (2) by actually accomplishing one or several of his signature promises, and (3) focusing more on specific goals rather than on how he's characterized. Indeed, how he's presented in the media without question will change once he consistently presents himself as a mature adult and coherently presents ideas in a way that indicates he's given them more rational consideration than would and can a disaffected ten year old. Quite simply, were Trump to act like a grown-up, he'd be treated like one.

 

[007]

I was led to believe that news reporters are supposed to report the news, not make shit up, but what the hell do I know, I dropped journalism and switched to computer science.

There's hasn't been a leftwing "news" outlet for decades. They are merely the propaganda wing of the DNC, and they're PISSED that their little commie queen lost and 8 years of their anti American agenda is being erased.

 

[Dragonlady]

This is a PERFECT example of the bias the right screams about.

What the article is, and the response I expected to see for I am well aware I played "devil's advocate" with my comments above, is that the article is an editorial and editorials make no pretence of being biased; thus what is there to complain about? Nothing.

Readers must be able to discern an editorial from a pure news article. Careful readers can, as I did, from Lekach's piece distill facts (verifying their veracity if desired) and ignore the "loaded" language that also is found in the story.

Was this written by a high school kid?

Ah, no, but then neither is Sasha Lekach among the nation and world's most highly regarded news and editorial writers, though she is competent as a writer. Neither, for that matter, is Yahoo News among the nation's/world's most highly regarded news and editorial publishing organizations.

So you're saying it's an editorial?

Why did you say "What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump? I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information."

Is this reporting or is it editorializing?

And if it's editorializing, why is it not identified anywhere as such?
.

This is where you're required to THINK for yourself. I know conservatives don't want to use critical thinking skills, or fact check, but these are necessary skills in the "post-truth" age of Donald Trump.

I fact check EVERYTHING.

That said, I am truly looking forward to this trip. Trump is such a disaster whenever he opens his mouth, that I can see this destroying relationships with your allies, even more than he's done already.

The world is laughing at your orange baboon.

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

 

[007]

This is a PERFECT example of the bias the right screams about.

What the article is, and the response I expected to see for I am well aware I played "devil's advocate" with my comments above, is that the article is an editorial and editorials make no pretence of being biased; thus what is there to complain about? Nothing.

Readers must be able to discern an editorial from a pure news article. Careful readers can, as I did, from Lekach's piece distill facts (verifying their veracity if desired) and ignore the "loaded" language that also is found in the story.

Was this written by a high school kid?

Ah, no, but then neither is Sasha Lekach among the nation and world's most highly regarded news and editorial writers, though she is competent as a writer. Neither, for that matter, is Yahoo News among the nation's/world's most highly regarded news and editorial publishing organizations.

So you're saying it's an editorial?

Why did you say "What statements in that article do you see as criticisms of Trump? I don't think you understand the difference between criticizing and reporting information."

Is this reporting or is it editorializing?

And if it's editorializing, why is it not identified anywhere as such?
.

This is where you're required to THINK for yourself. I know conservatives don't want to use critical thinking skills, or fact check, but these are necessary skills in the "post-truth" age of Donald Trump.

I fact check EVERYTHING.

That said, I am truly looking forward to this trip. Trump is such a disaster whenever he opens his mouth, that I can see this destroying relationships with your allies, even more than he's done already.

The world is laughing at your orange baboon.

Well, we have prog fake news, and we have fake comments from the idiots that listen to it... ^^^

 

[iceberg]

I'll ask again, then I'll just give up:

Is this a reporting-based, fact-based news article, or is it an opinion piece?
.

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

Bias, opinion, certainly.
.

that's my issue w/CNN. a vast majority of their headlines are TRUMP SUCKS DOO DOO and follow up later paragraphs of "well maybe, if he did". type articles. they take what he does and push it for max negative effect.

if you want me to believe something trump does is evil and needs to be stopped, they need to stop saying that about everything he says and does. and when your headlines are opinions, the article becomes one also - to me anyway.

and CNN has moved to being a buttload of opinion pieces.

The media has simply dropped all pretense, period.

It's not going to change, so Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.
.

Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.

Really, it's readers who need to do something, and the "something" they need to do is develop the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not. The the rubric article for this thread has several pieces of information in it; it's just the style in which they are presented that makes the piece editorial.

Trump can quite easily "deal with it" (1) by simply not blundering and blathering like a stark raving madman multiple times a day, (2) by actually accomplishing one or several of his signature promises, and (3) focusing more on specific goals rather than on how he's characterized. Indeed, how he's presented in the media without question will change once he consistently presents himself as a mature adult and coherently presents ideas in a way that indicates he's given them more rational consideration than would and can a disaffected ten year old. Quite simply, were Trump to act like a grown-up, he'd be treated like one.

so much truth here. readers eat it up as emotional validation or use it to spawn a counter-attack.

a counter attack on stupid. what's to win there?

while i 100% agree trump needs to grow up and shut up and do his job, the press needs to quit making shit up to make him look worse than he is. both sides are way out of line. but i would put trump in the lead by a little.

 

[usmbguest5318]

He's not making about point about whether the specific claims are accurate. He's observing, rightly, that the piece uses a lot of "loaded" terms, too many and some too puerile for the article to be seen as a pure news piece, that create a tone.

To Mac1958's credit, he's among the handful of members here who's shown enough integrity in his remarks so that his remarks about and critiques deriving from tone have merit in their own right. The vast majority of members here only understand things like tone and intent when it suits their rhetorical objectives to do so. Mac does not seem that way. That's not to say I'm saying he's right or wrong, but only that by his well presented ideas he's bought himself, with me at least, enough credibility that I'll fairly consider what he has to say rather than write him off as being merely a member of the "peanut gallery"/"echo chamber."

The facts of the article don't put Trump in a good light. Big deal. Are you saying every unflattering fact MUST be balanced by something flattering? I can see the articles now

"Drunken Junkie Kills Busload of Orphans and Nuns, but He Kept His Lawn Mowed Regularly"

Is that what you and he are demanding?

I'll ask again, then I'll just give up:

Is this a reporting-based, fact-based news article, or is it an opinion piece?
.

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

"Disaster" makes the headline be opinion. The trip cannot be a disaster until it's at least begun.

and that is my point. CNN and FOX and most "News" agencies litter their articles with this.

this is how fake news grows. period. maybe never intended to do that but opinions are not news.

opinions are not news.

I agree.

 

[Iceweasel]

I fact check EVERYTHING.

The world is laughing at your orange baboon.

You're in a foreign country that know only what leftist outlets feed you and wouldn't know a fact if you fell face first in it. You are not the world, just a dumb shit that thinks very highly of themselves.

 

[L.K.Eder]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

nigga please. "what if it were turned?" were you asleep the last 8 years, or more?

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

nigga please. "what if it were turned?" were you asleep the last 8 years, or more?

why don't you go find all those big bad articles that fox and / or others wrote daily making stuff up and demonizing every move.

not gonna play this *i *FEEL* like they did this so they did!" crap with you or anyone. you got this proof, show it.

or walk on.

don't care which.

 

[L.K.Eder]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

nigga please. "what if it were turned?" were you asleep the last 8 years, or more?

why don't you go find all those big bad articles that fox and / or others wrote daily making stuff up and demonizing every move.

not gonna play this *i *FEEL* like they did this so they did!" crap with you or anyone. you got this proof, show it.

or walk on.

don't care which.

search the board, noob. you will find plenty. you would know about them if you were serious, hero.

proposed search strings: "200 million dollar", "bowing", "body count", "apology tour", "benghazi", etc. pp.

 

[BULLDOG]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

The article was about specific steps that trump has taken which reduce the chances of a successful trip. You don't think the diplomats he will meet will be offended or have a lesser opinion of him for refusing to visit one of Israel's most revered sites just because he can't land his helicopter there, or that his supposed visit to another of their most revered sites is reduced to a 15 minute photo op? It's like he is trying to make the visit a disaster. His arrogance might have worked with contractors, but it is a detriment to diplomatic relations

 

[usmbguest5318]

This is a PERFECT example of the bias the right screams about.

What the article is, and the response I expected to see for I am well aware I played "devil's advocate" with my comments above, is that the article is an editorial and editorials make no pretence of being unbiased; thus what is there to complain about? Nothing.

Readers must be able to discern an editorial from a pure news article. Careful readers can, as I did, from Lekach's piece distill facts (verifying their veracity if desired) and ignore the "loaded" language that also is found in the story.

Was this written by a high school kid?

Ah, no, but then neither is Sasha Lekach among the nation and world's most highly regarded news and editorial writers, though she is competent as a writer. Neither, for that matter, is Yahoo News among the nation's/world's most highly regarded news and editorial publishing organizations.

do you read sharyl attkissons work? i view her as one of the few good ones out there.

I don't recognize her name. I realize that doesn't answer your question, but I don't know the answer to your question. Though I occasionally read editorials, the bulk of my reading consists of peer reviewed scholarly papers and books. The closest I get to "regularly" reading editorial content is reading the reports and editorials published by an assortment of "think tanks."

 

[Mac1958]

I'll ask again, then I'll just give up:

Is this a reporting-based, fact-based news article, or is it an opinion piece?
.

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

Bias, opinion, certainly.
.

that's my issue w/CNN. a vast majority of their headlines are TRUMP SUCKS DOO DOO and follow up later paragraphs of "well maybe, if he did". type articles. they take what he does and push it for max negative effect.

if you want me to believe something trump does is evil and needs to be stopped, they need to stop saying that about everything he says and does. and when your headlines are opinions, the article becomes one also - to me anyway.

and CNN has moved to being a buttload of opinion pieces.

The media has simply dropped all pretense, period.

It's not going to change, so Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.
.

Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.

Really, it's readers who need to do something, and the "something" they need to do is develop the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not. The the rubric article for this thread has several pieces of information in it; it's just the style in which they are presented that makes the piece editorial.

Trump can quite easily "deal with it" (1) by simply not blundering and blathering like a stark raving madman multiple times a day, (2) by actually accomplishing one or several of his signature promises, and (3) focusing more on specific goals rather than on how he's characterized. Indeed, how he's presented in the media without question will change once he consistently presents himself as a mature adult and coherently presents ideas in a way that indicates he's given them more rational consideration than would and can a disaffected ten year old. Quite simply, were Trump to act like a grown-up, he'd be treated like one.

Well, regarding Trump, no one has ever asked for it like he's asked for it. I've long since run out of adjectives for him.

Regarding developing the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not, holy crap - we're so far from that now that I see no way we get there from here. We have a perfectly intelligent poster on this thread sincerely believing that the piece is a straight news story. Getting to the people who just aren't as bright or not paying attention will take freaking decades.

I know I'm pretty fatalistic about this, but an (at least mostly) unbiased press plays an absolutely critical role in our republic, and what is happening now is dangerous.
.

 

[iceberg]

What a surprise, imagine the media prematurely passing judgement on President Trump. Start with the headline you want, then fill in the blanks. "Let's get him" has been the mantra since November 9th 2016. Facts don't matter, just cut him and keep doing it.
Trump's first foreign trip is already a disaster and it hasn't even started

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, they are so mean. somebody stop them

see - this is where the real danger lies.

you - i would guess - don't care for trump. ergo the media hit pieces are great for you and cannon fodder to make your day a sure fire giggle fest.

but what if it were turned? the media should not have this *Power* they claim they do not have. many people for whatever reason still look to CNN, Fox and other outlets as viable in trying to sort through the clouds of bullshit out there today.

in truth - they fan those flames and send up whatever smoke signal sells.

if you're ok with it being done to trump i hope you're ok when it works against you - cause it will. our sense of "fair play" died over the last decade and if we're gonna get through this, we need it back.

nigga please. "what if it were turned?" were you asleep the last 8 years, or more?

why don't you go find all those big bad articles that fox and / or others wrote daily making stuff up and demonizing every move.

not gonna play this *i *FEEL* like they did this so they did!" crap with you or anyone. you got this proof, show it.

or walk on.

don't care which.

search the board, noob. you will find plenty. you would know about them if you were serious, hero.

proposed search strings: "200 million dollar", "bowing", "body count", "apology tour", "benghazi", etc. pp.

sigh. guess you're busy living an entire life as a 13 year old.

later.

 

[iceberg]

is the headline a fact, or opinion?

Bias, opinion, certainly.
.

that's my issue w/CNN. a vast majority of their headlines are TRUMP SUCKS DOO DOO and follow up later paragraphs of "well maybe, if he did". type articles. they take what he does and push it for max negative effect.

if you want me to believe something trump does is evil and needs to be stopped, they need to stop saying that about everything he says and does. and when your headlines are opinions, the article becomes one also - to me anyway.

and CNN has moved to being a buttload of opinion pieces.

The media has simply dropped all pretense, period.

It's not going to change, so Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.
.

Trump and the GOP will have to find a way to deal with it.

Really, it's readers who need to do something, and the "something" they need to do is develop the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not. The the rubric article for this thread has several pieces of information in it; it's just the style in which they are presented that makes the piece editorial.

Trump can quite easily "deal with it" (1) by simply not blundering and blathering like a stark raving madman multiple times a day, (2) by actually accomplishing one or several of his signature promises, and (3) focusing more on specific goals rather than on how he's characterized. Indeed, how he's presented in the media without question will change once he consistently presents himself as a mature adult and coherently presents ideas in a way that indicates he's given them more rational consideration than would and can a disaffected ten year old. Quite simply, were Trump to act like a grown-up, he'd be treated like one.

Well, regarding Trump, no one has ever asked for it like he's asked for it. I've long since run out of adjectives for him.

Regarding developing the ability to discern what's editorial and what's not, holy crap - we're so far from that now that I see no way we get there from here. We have a perfectly intelligent poster on this thread sincerely believing that the piece is a straight news story. Getting to the people who just aren't as bright or not paying attention will take freaking decades.

I know I'm pretty fatalistic about this, but an (at least mostly) unbiased press plays an absolutely critical role in our republic, and what is happening now is dangerous.
.

maybe it's our backgrounds but i'm there with you.

this is beyond trump to me. he's an example of what the media is willing to do. a shining example maybe, but what they are doing is not their job. yet you can find pieces all around where they believe it *is* their job to tell people how to feel.

where do you combat that mentality? how do you go right and wrong from people who actually believe that?

our press should go after the truth. not people.

the truth is trump is an arrogant child like asshole. great. they don't need to report it daily.

this piece they did on watergate saying "a press that asks questions is vital..." - i put that right up there with trump saying "no ones been picked on more than me"

if you're doing the right thing you don't need to tell anyone all the time. it's obvious. if you're trying to sell it, then it's not what you say it is.

we need journalistic integrity back badly.