An Open Letter to the American Press

An Open Letter to the American Press
  • 524
  • 115
  • 10

My Recent Posts

[Note : The Boston Globe has convinced most major newspapers in the U.S. to write op-eds concerning Trumps “war on the press” this Thursday, August 16, 2018.  This would be my contribution to that effort.]

 

The founding fathers, I believe, considered the free press so essential to the survival of the Republic they considered it almost a fourth branch of government; a "fourth estate" if you will.  It is no accident that freedom of speech is protected in the Bill of Rights and equally no accident it is one of the first unalienable rights to be protected.  It's THAT important.

 

Protections in place, all was well; but who would ever have thought that the press would choose to abandon its esteemed place and responsibility?  Decades ago, the watchdog of politics and society voluntarily shacked itself into service to ideology.

 

The bias has bubbled and simmered under the surface all those years, denied by the practitioners, and obvious only to the most observant.  But with the election of Donald J Trump, the explosion of unhinged prejudice for some and favoritism towards others emerged for all to see; all but the most ardently partisan and unhinged themselves.

 

 

Given the state of the “free press”, it is not anti-First-Amendment nor even anti-press to point out the obvious.  In fact, it is more like pointing out the emperor has no clothes.  Something a few of us have been doing for a long, long time.

 

Trump is wrong to be so thin-skinned concerning every criticism.  Trump is right to point out that the current level of press fed "criticism" and bias are beyond the pale and something while present in the past has never reached this level of animus.  Meanwhile, the press is wrong to expect not to be criticized itself; in fact, such criticism is long overdue.  It would even do the press some good to engage in a little self-reflection; but given its current state isn’t likely.

 

This criticism of the press is NOT a call for violence; any more than the press’s criticism of Trump, his staff, or conservatives in general is such a call.  In fact, both sides should realize violent actions are a stain and set-back to their cause; and should repeatedly declare such behavior contrary to everything they believe and espouse; BOTH sides.  As for mine, I declare, in fact, the best defense against what the press has become is truth; revealing it, repeating it, reveling in it.  As for your side, the press would do well to better illuminate the very real, despicable, and increasing violence directed at Trump’s staff and conservatives.

 

Here is one such truth needing revealing and repeating.  If one considers the people and the Republic to be synonymous (and I do), then the press (in the state we find it today) is indeed an "enemy of the people".  This has never been more true than now; being more dangerous and subversive to our Republic than any current adversary or threat, foreign or domestic, real or trumped up.

 

Me?  I pray for a freer press.  Free from the shackles she has chosen; hysterically ranting in one breath, condescendingly righteous in another, and blindly protective in the next.  In these times, the people, the Republic, needs a free press more than ever.  But she is long gone, and likely never to return to us.

 

 

Comments

Dino Manalis Added Aug 15, 2018 - 2:37pm
 Trump and the press have to be less politicized and more independent and professional.  We need it!  Critique is acceptable, but they need to state the existence of alternative views.  The objective is to come together as a nation.
opher goodwin Added Aug 15, 2018 - 3:40pm
An unbiased media is essential to any democracy. The media is not unbiased. That is true.
But Trump's undermining of the media and his incessant lying does not help. He seems to think that bullying is the way forward.
Likewise other sources of information are not free of bias and may well be even more biased than mainstream media.
What is clear is that in this post-truth era Trump is merely seeking to feed his base with the raw meat they are lapping up. He isn't interested in truth.
It is unprecedented for this kind of media activity in a democracy. It should surely be a huge cause for concern for all people.
 
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 4:05pm
Dino >> Trump and the press have to be less politicized and more independent and professional.
 
I can't say we're on the same page here Dino.
 
Trump:
♦ Politicized?  No... Trump has no obligation to be less politicized.  A public office holder is by nature political.
♦ Independent?  Yes... Trump is already that in spades... it's part of the reason the establishment GOP hates him so much.
♦ Professional? Yes... Trump should strive to be more professional and presidential... most equate that with going along to get along... I don't.
 
The Press:
♦ Politicized?  Yes... the press by definition should not be political and THAT'S the problem.  They are already that in spades.
♦ Independent?  Yes... and again that is is the problem...  By definition they should be independent and aren't.
♦ Professional?  Yes... and AGAIN we see the problem... Something the press should be and isn't.
 
Dino >> Critique is acceptable, but they need to state the existence of alternative views.
 
I can't really agree with this.  The press has an obligation to objectively report; that's it and they have chosen to abandon that obligation.
 
Dino >> The objective is to come together as a nation.
 
I'm not a big fan of embracing "Can't we all just get along."  When you're taking the things I love to hell, I not in a get along mood... no should I be.  I'm in a stop you at all costs mood.
 
A lot of the nation has reached this conclusion… if it’s enough in time… we’ll see.
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 4:25pm
Opher >> An unbiased media is essential to any democracy. The media is not unbiased. That is true.
 
Initial agreement.  Good.  And yet I suspect we would not agree as to the nature and degree of the bias.
 
Opher >> But Trump's undermining of the media ...
 
See, I don't see Trump undermining the media.  The left thinks he is.  The media thinks he is.  But if you’re an incompetent boob at your job, if you intentionally choose not to do your job and I point that out… who has undermined you?  The messenger or you?
 
Trump points out the press as not favorable to his cause or those who support him.  That is simply stating an undeniable truth.
 
He points them out as purveyors of false information "fake news".  You may not like his wording, or descriptions BUT... That is simply stating a truth.
 
He calls the press (as it currently exists) an enemy of the people.  A press this biased IS an enemy of the people.  That is simply stating a truth.
 
If stating truth "undermines" the press... that's the press' fault; not the messengers.
 
Opher >> He seems to think that bullying is the way forward.
 
That is the leftist and press spin.  How is stating truth (or even opinion) about an industry bullying? 
 
Simply calling you and your profession dishonest liars and describing your product as “fake” is not bullying.  Continually pointing you out for your bias, lying, and hatred is not bullying.  The boy who pointed out the king is naked was not bullying the king.
 
About the only thing I've seen remotely resembling bullying would be the threat of pulling credentials to cover the White House.  Such "bullying" pales in comparison to the actual social and physical bulling White House staff has endured from the left (encouraged, and hardly covered by the press).
 
You want to see threats and encouraging of violence... watch the likes of Maxine Waters (again, something largely ignored by the press).
 
Opher >> Likewise other sources of information are not free of bias and may well be even more biased than mainstream media.
 
All sources are biased, and to be honest, I'm OK with that.  What I'm not OK with is pretending the bias is not there (which the media does in spades).
 
Opher >> What is clear is that in this post-truth era Trump ...
 
Yeah... because the truth era of Obama was so crystal clear. <eyes rolling emoji>
 
Opher >> ... is merely seeking to feed his base with the raw meat they are lapping up.
 
Yeah... because Obama never did such a thing... <eyes rolling emoji>
 
Why do I get the feeling you’re labels and outrage are selective?
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 4:25pm
Opher >> He isn't interested in truth.
 
The point of the post, Opher, is that the media (whose job is the discrimination of truth) hasn't done that job in decades and NOW is even worse at it than ever before.
 
Trump (along with every other politician) has a truth problem.  Absolutely.  Obama did too.  Did you see a lot of truth volunteered about pallets of cash sitting on an Iranian airstrip?  Trump is no better (or worse) than his predecessors.  What has changed IS the media and coverage.    Having the media wrapped around your little finger affords you a bit of discretion?  Obama had it Trump does not.
 
Less than honest politicians have always and often been the case throughout history... but with the watchdogs of the Republic (the press) a check was in place.  NOW? Those watchdogs have elected to become lapdogs. 
 
Lying politician are a dime a dozen.  But the founding fathers put a check and balance in place to mitigate for that.  A free press.  They failed to foresee a check and a balance that would simply elect to quite checking and balancing.
 
A lying politician (even the President) is not a danger of the existence of the Republic… a lying, deceitful, and complacent (not free) press IS.
 
Opher >> It is unprecedented for this kind of media activity in a democracy. It should surely be a huge cause for concern for all people.
 
Why do I think what you're talking about here is the Trump dishonesty?  What is really unprecedented is the level of media bias and dishonesty.  And as the post states, THAT is cause for concern because it is existential to the survival of the Republic.
 
Thanks for the comment…
Flying Junior Added Aug 15, 2018 - 4:34pm
Three points.
 
When liberals were reeling in horror trying to adjust to the reality of a Trump presidency, the press was among the first institutions to give him the respect due the office.
 
Trump has been screaming that the press is the enemy of the people and that they do not print the truth, only made-up stories.  Fake News!  I would love to see just one important story in a major newspaper in the last six months that is not almost completely factual.  It could be about anything, but I am guessing Trump hates it the most when his performance is shown in a poor light.
 
Maybe the accounts of Trump's behavior and actions that make him look bad are not lies at all, but mere reporting of the facts.
 
I think maybe you just miss seeing that bias in favor of Trump that you have become accustomed to in your favorite news sources.
 
It will be an interesting day.  I think the paywalls might be down.  I just read a free article on the venerated Boston Globe.
Flying Junior Added Aug 15, 2018 - 5:09pm
What's the big flap about the payment to Iran before the nuclear agreement?  It's no secret.  Is that the best you can come up with?  This money was in payment from claims and counter-claims filed at the Hague decades ago.  Iran had a right to collect, so they demanded it.  Here is the letter from the White House sent to Edward Royce, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives.
 
https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/03.17.16-DOS-Response-Concerns-re-1.7-Billion-Payout-to-Iran.pdf
 
I think you do need your conservative, anti-Obama bias to keep happy.
opher goodwin Added Aug 15, 2018 - 5:55pm
Tex - I am not privy to the media in the US but I am here. There is a bias here but it is still able to be discerned.
I do not believe that the media is as biased as you suggest.
There is some good reporting that is accurate. I think this attack on the media is not a good thing. It puts the whole of democracy at risk.
Pardero Added Aug 15, 2018 - 6:16pm
TexasLynn,
This operation could very well backfire, as it will tend to prove that the legacy media actually is a monolithic cabal whose interests do not align with ordinary Americans. 
 
Newspapers are already in a death spiral, this may hasten it. This will cause a few cancellations, I don't imagine that it will increase subscriptions or online viewing in liberal infested areas. Why would anyone pay money to get DNC talking points? The New York Post and National Enquirer surely cover titillation and scandal well enough, the large city papers probably rely on the sports section for subscriptions.
 
I just don't see a purpose for these large newspapers. Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller is all you really need for traditional, yet edgy, conservative political coverage. 
 
I would like to see Trump increase the participation of alternative and new media, at the expense of legacy media. 
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 7:30pm
FJ, Thank you for the points...
 
FJ >> When liberals were reeling in horror trying to adjust to the reality of a Trump presidency, the press was among the first institutions to give him the respect due the office.
 
Forgive me, I'm totally missing this.  Can you be more specific concerning this respect given.  My memory may be selective.  One may can argue that the there was a crescendo in the media hysteria; but I think it was there in the beginning.
 
FJ >> Trump has been screaming that the press is the enemy of the people and that they do not print the truth, only made-up stories.
 
Trump is Trump.  He is brash and rude and provocative... BUT his accusations have an element of truth.  The legacy (thanks Pardero) media has always (for decades, well before Trump) been biased against the right and for the left.  If one can't see that as an obvious truth, then I don't think any amount of objective proof will sway that opinion.
 
FJ >> I think maybe you just miss seeing that bias in favor of Trump that you have become accustomed to in your favorite news sources.
 
I certainly gravitate towards conservative sources of news... BUT, I make a point to diversify and take into account the bias of each source (including my own).
 
Fox News may be button #1 on my XM Radio, but NPR is right next to it... Progressive XM has a button too; so, I don't insulate myself in an echo chamber… though I do yell at my radio a lot. :)
 
FJ >> What's the big flap about the payment to Iran before the nuclear agreement?  It's no secret.
 
It was no secret because it was exposed.  Obama had no intention of that tidbit ever being public knowledge; at least not until the deal was done.  Only after it was exposed did he (with the help of the media) pretend it was common knowledge and no big deal.
 
Even the main stream media admits that the Obama administration was one of the most inaccessible.
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 7:30pm
 
Opher >> I am not privy to the media in the US but I am here. There is a bias here but it is still able to be discerned.
 
I'm not familiar with the media there... but would suspect it is even worse (as for as leftist bias) than over here.
 
Opher >> I do not believe that the media is as biased as you suggest.
 
Then you would be wrong.  There are a few conservative sources here (Fox, Wall Street Journal, talk radio, internet sites...) but by volume it makes up a small percentage of the overall news media.
 
There is practically nothing in the middle and the vast majority is on the left:
♦ Practically every other news station local and national, cable and broadcast
♦ Practically every urban newspaper in the country
 
Opher >> There is some good reporting that is accurate.
 
No... not really.  There may be bits of truth and facts scattered around but the overall direction practically always skews left.  A perfect example is Hillary Clinton breathing free air would not have been possible with a free press.
 
Opher >> I think this attack on the media is not a good thing.
 
We disagree.  When someone is in the wrong they should be called on it.  The legacy media is in the wrong and has been for many decades.  We're about 30 years late in pointing that out.  It’s time and God bless Trump for doing it.
 
Opher >> It puts the whole of democracy at risk.
 
The Republic is at risk and likely lost... the dishonest media is either a cause or a symptom... I'm not sure which.  Either way… a pox on all their houses.
TexasLynn Added Aug 15, 2018 - 7:31pm
Pardero >> This operation could very well backfire, as it will tend to prove that the legacy media actually is a monolithic cabal whose interests do not align with ordinary Americans.
 
This is indeed further proof... but at this point, who (other than leftist) don't know that by now.
 
Pardero >> Newspapers are already in a death spiral, this may hasten it. This will cause a few cancellations, I don't imagine that it will increase subscriptions...
 
I can't see it, simply because no conservative in their right mind has subscribed to these rags in many years.  Surely the only ones left are of the left and these editorials will just reinforce their little echo chambers.
 
The newspapers are indeed in a death spiral... and good riddance.  I would pay good money for a decent source of unbiased Texas (or national) news... there is not one to be had.  Not in Texas and I doubt in the whole country.
 
Pardero >> I just don't see a purpose for these large newspapers.
 
They are just buggy whip companies hanging on in the age of the automobile.  Worse, they’re buggy which companies that produce crappy buggy whips.
 
Pardero >> Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller is all you really need for traditional, yet edgy, conservative political coverage.
 
Amen brother... very good source.
 
Pardero >> I would like to see Trump increase the participation of alternative and new media, at the expense of legacy media.
 
Anything that takes those $%^$^ers down a notch is a blessing in my book. 
Leroy Added Aug 15, 2018 - 8:34pm
I think that we have a free press in that there are no laws forcing the press to tow the government line.  What we don't have is a media that allows everyone to exercise free speech.  Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube among others control who speaks and who doesn't.  It's not like the days of old when you could crank up your own printing press.  It's easier in one sense that anyone with a keyboard can express a point of view.  But, if you can't get your message out on one of the major platforms, you are effectively silenced.
 
A free press will always be biased unless it only reports the facts.  Even facts have a point of view.  As soon as the analysis begins, the bias starts.  We've never had an unbiased press.  We lived in ignorance.  We had three major sources in the past.  We trusted them.  We were too naive to question their authority.  Today, we have thousands of sources, but only limited means to get the message out.
 
If a press reported from the point of view of the Constitution, it would be considered conservative.  It would have a conservative bias.  For me, it might be bias-free because the Constitution would have a neutral bias.  For a liberal, it would be a right wing rag.  Maxine Waters might represent the left's neutral point.
 
A free press should have the freedom to have a bias.  Many people, including conservatives, don't like Alex Jones.  I think he should be allowed to share his opinion of events, even if I don't like his opinion.  When the media systematic shut down such people, we no longer have a free press.  That part worries me.  A liberal interprets a free press as news it agrees with. If we are truly to have a free press, people like Alex Jones and Maxine Walters must have a voice.
Flying Junior Added Aug 15, 2018 - 9:01pm
It is interesting to hear what you guys think from the other side.  Pardero, are we really vermin?  lol
 
In truth, the Daily Caller has evolved quite a bit in the last ten years since I last took a look.  Avoid the opinion page and you're good to go!
 
Personally, I can't wait to read these editorials.  Of particular interest should be the moral conservatives who are not afraid to speak out.
 
You guys laugh at what a brash, outspoken loudmouth Trump is as if it's no big deal.  It's a huge deal when millions of Americans no longer trust the media at the behest of a maniacal screaming me-me!
Even A Broken Clock Added Aug 15, 2018 - 9:12pm
Let me interject two items that came from local reporting in little old West Virginia over the past couple of years, from the "biased" press. Our local paper the West Virginia Gazette Mail (itself a merger of a conservative and liberal paper) dug down into the root causes of the opioid and heroin epidemics ravaging our region. They were the ones who found the facts that showed that millions of individual opioid pills were being sent to pharmacies in tiny towns in southern West Virginia (and some in the Charleston area). They tracked down the sources that showed how the state refused to get involved in the egregious over-prescription of opioids in this area for years until it blossomed into a full-fledged heroin epidemic. And this little newspaper won a Pulitzer prize in recognition of their reporting. Was this effort a biased source that we should all have ignored due to the messenger being tainted?
 
Second, a local TV reporter was contacted by someone inside of the WV supreme court, who wanted to publicize exorbitant spending on office remodeling plus self-serving practices regarding expense reimbursements and excessive payments to retired justices for serving during vacations. The fallout from this has resulted in two resignations in the WV supreme court (out of 5 members), one justice who has 3 different federal indictments, and the other two justices have been impeached by the state House of Representatives. Should we have just been willing to let the government entities take care of themselves, without any oversight?
 
This is why we need an active and vigilant press, and yes, that press will be adversarial to those in power. It is in their nature. It is what they are called to do.
 
For the national press, given the egregious nature of the Trump administration, I'm surprised that they've given him as much slack as they have. He is the total antithesis of what he presented himself as being. And that's as much as I'll say about him. Otherwise I'd really piss folks off.
Even A Broken Clock Added Aug 15, 2018 - 9:17pm
Leroy - the fault that I see in your argument is that allowing people to use other private platforms to disseminate their perspective is not covered by the first amendment. Anyone who is banned from one of the private social media companies is still able to put out their own web page and solicit views. It just becomes more inconvenient when the main platforms ban content providers.
 
Heck, you can even view this site as a source of free speech. Nothing prevents A. Jones from presenting his own views as comments here - wait a minute, no, not our A. Jones. Don't think he is linked with the conspiracy theorist - he at least talks sense some times.
Bill H. Added Aug 15, 2018 - 9:50pm
 
Trump's only retaliation to getting caught at doing dirty deeds is to blame and demean those who discover what he is up to and make it public. Now we find out he is revoking security clearances of those in prior administrations and those who have left his administration as a retaliatory effort for being criticized.
Our free press is designed as a check to be a watchdog on all politicians, be them "Left" or "Right" or whatever. Without a free press, we are open to becoming exactly what Trump wants.....a Dictatorship.
Trump is playing a game with both the press and his supporters. It is to try and get his base to become convinced that "The Press is the enemy of the people". His tactic is to piss of the press so that they will turn against him and then whine and moan to his base, who will sympathize with him and come to his defense, no matter what.
James Travil Added Aug 16, 2018 - 12:09am
Very good article Lynn, I completely agree with you on this. As a moderate independent centrist I believe that my opinion on this is about as neutral and unbiased as possible. I avoid all extremist (left or right) media, so no MSNBC or Fox. And I avoid all exposed unrepentant fake news outlets, so no CNN or BBC (more on that later). That all said I believe very firmly that the establishment (ie: legacy) corporate mainstream media outlets are very biased towards neoliberal and neocon sources. Particularly neoliberals, as per the Democratic Party. I've seen this for sometime now, but as you point out it has gotten worse as of late
 
Furthermore, as a Satanist I have a more untraditional lifestyle, and as such two ladies in my life, as opposed to a single wife (I don't like single women, I prefer mine in pairs :) in any event one of my ladies is a liberal and the other a conservative. They keep me centered and balanced politically. The conservative very much believes that there is a liberal bias in the news. The liberal (a progressive, not an establishment neoliberal) even agrees with this, although she has shown me that the liberal bias is anti-progressive pro-neoliberal, but overall we all agree on the fact that the mainstream media is biased, and badly at that
 
For news I only go to quality independent journalists and media outlets (left, right, and in between), such as Truthdig, Truthout, OpEdNews, Zero Hedge, consortiumnews.com, Counterpunch, Information Clearing House, and the newsletters from Paul Craig Roberts and Caitlin Johnstone. So there are a few good places to go for real news
 
Someone asked for proof of a newspaper publishing fake news. I don't have it in from of me right now but The New York Times published a fake news smear piece on independent media called PropOrNot which, with zero evidence, claimed that virtually all independent media was Russian Propaganda. They later pulled back from their ridiculous claims but never issued a retraction. And of course the Washington Post (which is owned by a CIA contractor BTW) has endlessly published Russian Hacking conspiracy theories and other Russiagate nonsense, all without a shred of evidence to back it up. Meanwhile they either ignored the WikiLeaks revelations about the Clinton campaign or pretended that some doing actual journalism and publishing true information about public figures was worse than the election rigging by the DNC or the various lies and prejudices revealed about Hillary Clinton in the Podesta emails
 
Now finally, unlike the newspaper stuff I have absolute proof of my claim that CNN and the BBC are fake news. Feast your eyes on the following: “Five Reasons To Be Absolutely Certain That The Establishment Is Lying About Syria” https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/five-reasons-to-be-absolutely-certain-that-the-establishment-is-lying-about-syria-46402a4c7888
Pardero Added Aug 16, 2018 - 12:27am
Flying Junior,
I took some poetic license there. I switched words several times, but wound up using it in a tongue in cheek way. Liberals used to be reliable anti-war allies, and I can usually find some common ground, but it is getting harder. 
 
This Russia nonsense has done a lot of damage to what little bi-partisanship remained in this country. Some of the middle and right does not have a problem with Russia, but the neocons are furiously working to flip them. 
 
Except for a few independent thinkers, we are becoming a uniparty with regards to Russia. Of course, it is merely cynical political manipulation by many politicos, but a lot of ignorant people are ready to go to war with Russia, and Iran, too. This rivals the campaign to flip America to go to war with Germany, just over a hundred years ago.
 
I argued and pleaded with you people in the run up to the Gulf War. I was cursed and called a traitor. My neighbor, Carl Kumpala passed away. He was so proud of his Finnish heritage, that I asked his wife if I could place miniature American and Finnish flags with some flowers on his grave. She was pleased with the idea. I got an extra Finnish flag for me, because I am a Finnland buff. A brother in law was so rabid and worked up from the propaganda, that his ignorance concluded that the strange flag must be Iraqi, although it had a cross on it! He threatened to call authorities and agencies until I was arrested for treason.
 
Ten years later, I found myself back in the mainstream, though I hadn't moved one iota.
 
I am pleased that you have retained your sense of humor. I feared that it might be a decade before some of you become rational again. 
 
This kind of propaganda and manipulation is incredibly powerful. It taps into your tribal  instincts. You are subconsciously compelled to fight and defend the tribe. I may be innoculated against it because I consider all the European tribes as my tribe(s). To me, it is like the conflict in Northern Ireland. I identified with both, and didn't want to see anyone hurt.
 
As for the press, they need to be taken down much further. They can earn their credibility back with real journalism, instead of punditry.
 
I agree with Even A Broken Clock and Bill H., to a degree. If the press doesn't pull their heads out of their backsides, it could go too far. Perhaps alternative media could entirely supplant them, if they persist. Alternative media would grow into their new role, in time, and warn us of threats to the Constitution. 
 
I am off to Daily Caller, Zerohedge, Anti-war.com, and RT to find out what really happened today.
 
James Travil,
You are far better informed than I am. Good comment.
Ken Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:27am
Freedom of the press is being so abused today.  Press has never been impartial, just look at the press between Jefferson and Adams in the presidential campaign.  If you have never seen what the papers said you will be stunned, but they were known to be biased.
 
Today the press tries to present itself as unbiased while 90% or more are leftists.  They are pushing agenda not news (as they did before but today they are dishonest about that)
 
The entire point of freedom of the press was so that government couldn't shut down anything they disagreed with or didn't want to hear.
 
Much of the press today is actually "the enemy of the people" whether you like to admit it or not.  They are so ideologically driven to their agenda that they would rather take down a president and not allow him to govern than they are to report on what is happening.
 
They are so focused on everything anti-Trump to take him out, this is unprecedented.  You don't even have to be a Trump supporter to see this (although all you non-Trump supporters will disagree with this because you are ideologues that don't give a damn about America but simply want your ideology pushed forward more)
James Travil Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:32am
" You don't even have to be a Trump supporter to see this (although all you non-Trump supporters will disagree with this because you are ideologues that don't give a damn about America but simply want your ideology pushed forward more)"
Untrue, I'm a non-Trump supporter and I agreed with this. I definitely know other centrists and even a few progressives who see it as true as well. Everyone isn't an ideologue. 
Flying Junior Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:01am
Pardero,
 
I too opposed the run-up to the war in Iraq.  The first time that I became aware of it, incredibly, was a protest near Hyde Park in Kensington, London.  Iraqi Brits took about seventy-five feet of sidewalk to unfurl a banner that read, "United States Out of Iraq."  It was about forty to sixty people.  It was September of 2002.  I was on vacation.  I had no idea what they were talking about.  But I never forgot it.
 
When I got home in late September, I quickly began to understand what was going on.  I read about and witnessed a Bob Hope class cargo ship being loaded to the gunwhales with Bradley Fighting Vehicles, tanks, air-conditioned tents, guns, ammo, you name it.
 
I didn't witness it being loaded.  I saw it about a week later tacking southwest off of the coast of La Jolla to head through the Panama Canal on its way to the Persian Gulf.
 
So I knew it was a total lie when the shrub gave his 48 hour ultimatum to Saddam Hussein several weeks later.  The U.S. was headed to war and there was nothing anyone could have done to stop it.  I remember arguing with Leroy about where the first missiles/bombs came from.
 
I hope that's the last time you call me a neocon.  I'm a democrat.  Maybe the Senator from New York voted for the UAMF, but it was the evil republicans that ordered it.  That's quite a stretch to blame Iraq on Hillary instead of Dick Cheney.
 
What I meant to say was, "That's okay, I consider you my friend.  No problem"
 
Don't root for the demise of printed media in the U.S.  Much more of this and you're going to need deprogramming!
 
Hey, hey, Boo-Boo!
Pardero Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:26am
I have never voted for a Bush or a Cheney(or a McCain, for that matter). Dick's daughter is sure to win, but it will be without my vote. Nor will I vote for the neocon Barrasso. 
 
I would like you to revisit those emotions from the Iraq War, to innoculate yourself, amigo.
Flying Junior Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:29am
I cut my teeth opposing the war in Viet Nam.
Flying Junior Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:33am
 

¡Dios mío! I didn't even know she was in the U.S. Congress.

Ay yay yay.


Cullen Kehoe Added Aug 16, 2018 - 3:19am
The U.S. press and Trump deserve each other. Both act like juvenile children.
 
Oh wait...this just in....anonymous sources are saying that Trump kicked his Russian dog last night....how did he get a dog from Russia?....and the dog has blond hair and blue eyes....what can we learn from this Anderson? 
 
"Well he's clearly a racist, a 'white' dog, how much more evidence do we need? And the fact that it's from Russia means he's a Russian agent and should be impeached immediately. In fact, everyone should go into restaurants and harass any Trump supporter you can find until violence breaks out. Join the resistance. The only way we can get rid of a president is to up the ante".
 
 - "Wait there Anderson, I thought you can just vote him out of office in the next election."
 
"....yeah, I mean you could do that, but the best thing would be to join the resistance and harass those deplorables wherever you find them."
James Travil Added Aug 16, 2018 - 3:59am
Who is this Anderson? Anderson Cooper the neoliberal fake news hack maybe? Who?? 
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 4:24am
EABC - I quite agree. We have some brilliant reporting on issues and some superb, in-depth TV documentaries. I think it is extremely easy to condemn newspapers and claim they are mouthpieces of political stances. Some are. Our tabloid press is despicably right-wing and populist. But in general our press is excellent, thought provoking and does in-depth investigation.
To discount all news in this way is part of the post-truth agenda. Reject all experts. They all lie. 
That is the death of democracy. It enables an unscrupulous leader, like Trump, to manipulate people.
Leroy Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:15am
"Our free press is designed as a check to be a watchdog on all politicians, be them "Left" or "Right" or whatever."
 
Our free press isn't designed to be anything.  It is not required to be a watchdog.  It is not designed for politicians.  It's all pie in the sky BS.  To say otherwise is to imply that we need laws to make it work as designed.  It is to imply that we need some sort of checks and balances to the press.  That it needs some sort of oversight.  The moment that happens, it is no longer free.
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:20am
Leroy - there is the dilemma. In the UK we are going through a real in-depth look at the media and the way checks and balances can be brought to bear to ensure accuracy without stopping the freedom to report.
Leroy Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:34am
Whose accuracy?  Sounds like code for censoring.
Bill Kamps Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:03am
Lyn, what is your opinion of what the press did decades ago, when because there were few information outlets, they were able to edit the news.  They were able to successfully hide the behavior and decisions of politicians for what they said was the good of the country.  
 
My opinion is that these actions were no better than the actions of the press today, when the clearly have a bias and an agenda.  In fact, my opinion is that the press, being human, has often displayed a bias either known explicitly by the reporter, or at least subconsciously.
 
In many cases the bias in the interview is blatant.  The person being interviewed is asked leading questions which clearly show the belief of the reporter.  If the person being interview does not agree with the reporter, the question is asked again, in the form of the "dont you think?" question made famous by Katie Couric. 
 
I dont know if it is avoidable.  If my choices are a shackled press as they have in China, or a messy opinionated press as we have today, I will take our mess.  Since the press is made of humans, and all intelligent humans have a point of view, it is what it is.
 
What does annoy me, is when the press pretends to be unbiased, and gets holier than thou.  They aren't  unbiased, and Im not sure they ever were, so they need to stop pretending, and just do the best they can.
Ric Wells Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:12am
I'm correct you're wrong. I'm unbiased you're biased. This is an issue that has been debated for over two centuries in this nation. Even John Adams showed his bias when he signed the sedition act during his presidency censoring the press. In my opinion this is a useless and senseless debate. The press will always show bias in a way that garners readership or viewership which in turn puts money in their pockets. We are all biased due to the exposure we encounter as we progress through life. All history books are full of imperfections and bias because they purposely or inadvertently contain the writers point of view which by definition is biased.  
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:21am
Great comments all… I’ll reply to a few and more later today…
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Leroy,
You are correct in the assertion that the press is free from government control; which is the historical natural enemy of the press.  The intent of the article is to use that concept to make the point that the press has enslaved itself to ideology.
 
You are also correct that the press will always be biased.  Believe it or not, I'm OK with that too.  They should have that freedom.  The best case would be for the press to be up front about the bias.  Not being truthful about bias is dishonest which is what we have in the U.S. today.  Failing that, it is further dishonest to complain when called out on it.
 
The titans of social media are all biased as well... and to the left.  That has been proven repeatedly.  As with all extremes, there is often backlash (Trump being a perfect example).  It would make good business sense to curb that bias, but often ideology trumps common sense.
 
Freedom of speech is sacred and inalienable.  The likes of Alex Jones and Maxine Waters should always have a voice in the marketplace of ideas.  As should TexasLynn to call bias and bullshit. :)
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
FJ >> Personally, I can't wait to read these editorials.  Of particular interest should be the moral conservatives who are not afraid to speak out.
 
I think it's cute that you believe there will be any "conservative" points of view expressed.  At best it might be ratio of 10 to 1... but much more likely 10 to 0.
 
Maybe we can expect a few bones (letters to the editor) later next week.  Certainly nobody that works for a newspaper will be doing anything but bashing Trump.
 
FJ >> You guys laugh at what a brash, outspoken loudmouth Trump is as if it's no big deal.  It's a huge deal when millions of Americans no longer trust the media at the behest of a maniacal screaming me-me!
 
News Flash FJ... we didn't trust the media long before Trump showed up.  As with many things Trumps says, he is only giving voice to what was already there.  Illegal Immigration, the swamp, the corruption... the media.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
EABC >> Let me interject two items that came from local reporting...
 
God bless the media when they get it right.  My post does not say EVERYTHING written is wrong, fake, or biased.  The overall reporting is and if it's about politics, you can just about bet on it.
 
EABC >> This is why we need an active and vigilant press, and yes, that press will be adversarial to those in power.
 
Totally agree.  But that is not what we have.  We have a vigilant press, a watchdog, for all things Trump, all things conservative.  For all things left... we have a lapdog.
 
EABC >> Anyone who is banned from one of the private social media companies is still able to put out their own web page and solicit views.
 
You do have a point here in that these are private platforms... that's fine... but when you have a monopoly abusing its power; that's not so fine.  Also, in the past such common services have been designated utilities... which is also not beyond the pale here.
 
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:22am
Bill H >> Trump's only retaliation to getting caught at doing dirty deeds is to blame and demean those who discover what he is up to and make it public.
 
Trump... Trump... Trump... Trump... the media was biased well before Trump.  His election just put them into unhinged overdrive.
 
Bill H >> Our free press is designed as a check to be a watchdog on all politicians, be them "Left" or "Right" or whatever.
 
Exactly!  And there not.  They are a great watchdog for the right (as they should be).  They are lapdogs for the left.
 
Bill H >> Without a free press, we are open to becoming exactly what Trump wants.....a Dictatorship.
 
Exactly!  No free press and we're likely to get that the leadership left wants.... an oligarchy.  Which, is exactly where we are headed if things don't improve.
 
Bill H >> It is to try and get his base to become convinced that "The Press is the enemy of the people".
 
I didn't vote for Trump and have known the legacy press to be the enemy of the people and purveyors of misinformation for most of my life.  It is refreshing to have someone call them out... even someone as brash as Trump.  More should join that chorus.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
James T, Thanks for your take on the post.  Personally, it is easy for me to see that the likes of Fox News and a few (very few) other sources skew right.  It is beyond my understanding how anybody can't see the vast majority of the rest of the legacy media skews left (some extremely left).
 
I do see your point that the leftist skew is more the neoliberal direction.  A lot of power and money are behind this.  Though don't get me wrong the progressive agenda just takes us to a different hell than the neoliberal direction.
 
I admit that sources like Fox are part of my new consumption, but I try to go to as many disparate sources as I can.  Again, I appreciate your input on possible new sources... and insight on the state of the news industry today.
 
There is a quote from the book "The Last Unicorn" by Peter S Beagle that once resonated with me.  It went something like this... "I trust not what I hear nor what I see.  There may be truth somewhere in the world, but it never gets down to me."
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Pardero >> As for the press, they need to be taken down much further. They can earn their credibility back with real journalism, instead of punditry.
 
Exactly... You would think going bankrupt would inspire one to introspection and repentance.  I don't know what it's going to take to bring the press to it's senses, but until then they need to be exposed and torn town.  I'll keep doing my part.
 
Pardero >> Perhaps alternative media could entirely supplant them, if they persist.
 
Hard to say, since alternative media currently relies on them for source material... and seeks legal protection behind simply being a platform and not a source.
 
Pardero >> Alternative media would grow into their new role, in time, and warn us of threats to the Constitution.
 
Or grow and in time... and hide from us the threats to the Constitution.  It could go either way.
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:23am
Ken >> The entire point of freedom of the press was so that government couldn't shut down anything they disagreed with or didn't want to hear.
 
Yes... and we have that.  The press is even free to be biased as it practically always has been.
 
What the press seeks today with this push is they think they deserve not to be criticized and try to paint criticism as an attack on their freedoms.  It's not.  If anything, it proves her sister freedom of speech for all is alive and well (for now).
 
Ken >> Today the press tries to present itself as unbiased while 90% or more are leftists.  They are pushing agenda not news (as they did before but today they are dishonest about that)
 
Exactly.  The problem isn't necessarily the bias, it's the disingenuousness about the bias.  Push an agenda all you want to but be honest about it... don't pretend pretend you're a journalist or cry foul when your true motives are pointed out.
 
Ken >> Much of the press today is actually "the enemy of the people" whether you like to admit it or not. 
 
But, to be clear, it didn't start today, or yesterday, or a with the election of Trump.  The legacy press has been "the enemy of the people" for decades.  It's just clearer today (with Trump) than it has ever been before.  Trump has simply brought out the worst in them.  It is unprecedented.
 
James T does make a valid point, though.  I'm glad to see there are a few who can get past the fog and see the press for what it is.  And (as he has shown us) even a few on the left get that.
HUTLEY Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:27am
Watching from Canada, I can tell you, Fox doeesn't report negative things about Trump half the time, and CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS do. I don't understand how people can be so naive when Trump says they're fake news. If all they printed was fake news, they'd have been sued, fined in court etc. He's hoping the benighted masses will not investigate and just listen to his diatribes and defenders.
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:28am
Leroy - ensuring that the press operate ethically and do not tell lies is not censoring is it?
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:29am
Tex - here is the list of 3001 lies that Trump has said up until now:
This is a catalogue of Trump's 3001 blatant lies - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html
Now where is the fake news coming from?
Bill Kamps Added Aug 16, 2018 - 11:34am
opher, virtually all politicians lie.  That Trump is doing it is nothing new.  Even the sainted Jimmy Carter lied pretty  often, it is part of the job.  The fake news comes from lots of sources, and has been for as long as I have been alive.  That it is more obvious now, is simply because of the more information outlets that we have. 
Bill H. Added Aug 16, 2018 - 11:46am
 
Bill K - I think the issue is that Trump habitually lies and somehow actually believes that everyone will just go with the flow. I'm sure he mastered the art of lying in his prior job and still thinks it will work with the American people. In many cases I think he actually believes his own lies.
An old boss I worked under for almost 10 years was an ultra-narcissist and lied his ass off constantly. It was mainly geared at reinforcing his ego and getting his way with everything. This guy was a carbon copy of Trump.
Leroy Added Aug 16, 2018 - 12:10pm
"Leroy - ensuring that the press operate ethically and do not tell lies is not censoring is it?"
 
Whose ethics and whose lies?  I know that you don't intentionally spread falsehoods.  You actually believe the things you post.  Your socialist idealism is ethically challenged from my point of view.  From your point of view, it is fairness. 
 
If you were the ethics and fact-checker, I would have serious concerns.  If I were the ethics and fact-checker, you would have concerns.   I suggest that we have no censoring or, better yet, that we self-censor.  Let's assume that everyone is intelligent enough to figure it out from themselves, even if they are not.  It is better than assuming that your fellow man is an idiot and you are the brightest bulb in the building, even if it is true.
 
So, to answer your question, Opher, yes, hell yes.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:13pm
The US press is unduly biased and have become a pack of political lackeys blowing the same  anti-capitalist horn as they have done since FDR. 
 
Just reject the Fake News using any version of 1A that you choose or that they have chosen. 
 
The Editorial Section of the Boston Glob is not fit to line my parrot cage. 
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:15pm
Bill H.
 
"Bill K - I think the issue is that Trump habitually lies and somehow actually believes that everyone will just go with the flow."
 
Contrast this notion against what we know about Hillary and tell us what the differences are. 
 
When he calls liberals low-life or losers that is not a lie that is an opinion, sanctioned by 1A.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:19pm
HUTLEY
 
"Watching from Canada, I can tell you, Fox doeesn't report negative things about Trump half the time, and CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS do. I don't understand how people can be so naive when Trump says they're fake news."
 
The rabid retorts from CBS, ABC, NBC, LA Times, NYT, Boston Glob attempt to 'influence' their victims into believing that  DJT lies constantly. He does not. 
 
People see the bias and rage and reject these groups more and more. 
 
Good
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:30pm
Cullen K >> The U.S. press and Trump deserve each other. Both act like juvenile children.
 
I'm not fan of either.  I like some of what Trump does and grit my teeth at the rest.  I dislike the bias and intellectual dishonesty of the media but acknowledge that not everything they publish is fake or biased.
 
Your depiction of the media reporting while tongue-in-cheek perfectly illustrates what we constantly hear from the likes of the legacy media.
 
Cullen K >> In fact, everyone should go into restaurants and harass any Trump supporter you can find until violence breaks out.
 
That's an interesting point here.  The media opines that what Trump is saying may cause violence against them.  It hasn't yet... but it might.  Meanwhile what they are pushing HAS caused violence and harassment of those who work for or support Trump.  AND... they practically ignore it while giving voice to those like Maxine Waters who further encourage it.  Hypocrisy.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Opher >> We have some brilliant reporting on issues and some superb, in-depth TV documentaries.  I think it is extremely easy to condemn newspapers and claim they are mouthpieces of political stances.
 
These two things are not mutually exclusive.  You can on one hand have some superb reporting and investigation (especially against conservatives) and on the other never fully follow up on something on the left (like Hillary Clinton).
 
The press should in no way ease up on its watching of the right.  It should just apply the same scrutiny on the left.  I won’t hold my breath…
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:30pm
Leroy,
I agree that the press has no design or responsibility to be anything.  A free press is indeed free to provide as good or as bad a product as any other business.  The key is for government not to interfere with the what they decide to be.
 
But... what these editorials are all about is the press wanting to stifle condemnation for a bad decision; a decision to be biased.  And THAT they are not entitled to.  By all means, be biased as you want... but spare us the spoiled brat cry-baby antics when you're called on it.
 
And while the press is not required to be a watchdog... one of the societal benefits of a truly free press is that watchdog aspect of their job.  There is nothing wrong with wishing that aspect was present and equally applied.
 
We certainly need no laws to force the press to do anything or for government to perform any king of oversight.  Such laws would be unconstitutional and a slippery slope of government censorship and eventual control.  I don't trust the press... I trust government less... much, much less.
 
Leroy >> Whose accuracy?  Sounds like code for censoring.
 
Exactly.  Government checks and balances degrade into nothing less than control and oppression.  Confiscation of guns and clamping down on the press are always the first two things socialist tyrants do when taking over.
 
Opher >> Leroy - ensuring that the press operate ethically and do not tell lies is not censoring is it?
 
Actually, that is exactly what such checks degrade in to.  But take heart, socialist dictators the world over would agree with you.
 
Opher >> Tex - here is the list of 3001 lies that Trump...
 
From the New York Times no less.  I can hardly wait to slog through those... :)  I get enough exposure to TDS here, thank you…
 
Leroy >> If you were the ethics and fact-checker, I would have serious concerns.  If I were the ethics and fact-checker, you would have concerns.   I suggest that we have no censoring...
 
Amen brother.  The press we have is horrible.  The only imaginable thing that could be worse would be a government regulated press.  I understand that it is in Opher’s nature to trust the state and bureaucrats.  History and common sense tell us to never make that mistake.
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:31pm
Bill K, as many have commented here... the press had always had a bias and always hid or selectively reported what they wanted the public to know.  I don't deny that.  I do think that the volume and hysteria are at a peak today than any other time in our history.  The bias has always been there; just better hidden.
 
I also agree that it's just human nature to apply bias.  We are flawed... that is just a fact of nature.
 
I need to be clear that I am not calling for any form of government control of the press.  The only control I seek is through the marketplace.  If your product sucks I won't buy it.  If you're selling ice to Eskimos (leftist reporting in a saturated market) you'll get paid what you deserve.
 
The mess we have is just fine, especially if the alternative is the oppression of the likes of a Communist/Socialist nation.
 
My annoyance is the same as yours.  The purpose of today's editorials is to claim criticism is equivalent to attacking the free press.  It's holier than thou and it's BS.  I'll continue to call them what they are.  The emperor (press) has no clothes.
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:31pm
Ric Wells,
I agree on the nature of bias and its prevalence in human nature and history.  I would disagree that the debate is useless and senseless. 
 
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
 
Viva la revolución!
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Hutley >> Watching from Canada, I can tell you, Fox doeesn't report negative things about Trump half the time, and CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS do. I don't understand how people can be so naive when Trump says they're fake news.
 
Switch that to Hillary Clinton or just about anybody on the left and your statement can be reversed.  But note that the disparity between liberal to conservative bias is about 10 to 1.
 
Also, much of the negative things about Trump is hysterical opinion and commentary... not facts.
 
Yes, Fox is biased.  I (a conservative) see that.  So is CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, et al... but the left can't see that.  Who is being intellectually honest here and who isn't?
 
Hutley >> If all they printed was fake news, they'd have been sued, fined in court etc.
 
And on what do you base this?  Media liability (because of the First Amendment) is a very high threshold (as it should be); and even more so for politicians and public figures.
 
Hutley >> He's hoping the benighted masses will not investigate and just listen to his diatribes and defenders.
 
And... off we go into TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:35pm
Again… thanks for all for the comments.
 
This is a link to the Houston Chronicles contribution to this organized editorial effort: The real enemy of the people? It’s not the press
 
It's about what you would expect. 
 
No "moral conservative" take at the Houston Chronicle, Flying J... Big surprise!
 
Maybe we'll find that point of view at one of those conservative newspapers... oh... wait... there aren't any.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:42pm
HA HA HA,
A WOMAN OF COLOR HAS TAKEN OVER EVERY NEWS CHANNEL AND RIGHTFULLY SO,
WHODDUH TAWT ARETHA'S DEATH WOULD STEAL DON THE CON'S NIT TWIT/TWITTER NONSENCE?
 
TALK ABOUT POETIC JUSTICE!
 
~The Bug~
Bill Kamps Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:50pm
Lynn, I agree.  Criticizing the press is not restricting their rights. 
 
I hear many claims that Trump is interfering with the freedom of the press.  In my opinion he is doing no such thing.  He has done nothing to restrict their constitutional rights.  He has proposed no new laws, no new Constitutional Amendments.  He is calling them out, and criticizing them, yes granted using a very loud pulpit.  But  then isnt that the game the press plays with the average citizen.   People avoid picking fights with the press because they "buy ink by the barrel and paper by the ton"
 
Even if Trump is incorrect at various times about what the Press has said or done, Trump's freedoms, allow him to be wrong, biased, or even lie.  None of that restricts the press freedom. 
Bill Kamps Added Aug 16, 2018 - 1:57pm
This is a link to the Houston Chronicles contribution to this organized editorial effort: target="_blank">The real enemy of the people? It’s not the press
 
Yes  There the Chronicle implies that because the press does some good, it must therefore be innocent of the claims made against them.   Most organizations and people are not all bad or all good, and doing some good does not make them innocent of the bad.  The press can still be an enemy under some circumstance, and a ally under other circumstances. 
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:47pm
Bill - Trump is - he is undermining truth. He is lying and telling people that any criticism of him is fake news. I think it is an extremely dangerous game. He is inciting division and stupidity - a belief in nonsense.
opher goodwin Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:49pm
Tex - you must be joking if you think there isn't a conservative voice in the media. How right does America have to go before it falls off the edge into outright fascism?
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 16, 2018 - 2:58pm
opher goodwin
 
"Bill - Trump is - he is undermining truth. "
 
But Hillary and Bill told dah troot??
 
"He is lying and telling people that any criticism of him is fake news."
 
A pure lie. He is inspired by criticism in two ways:
 
[1] forces introspection and analysis
[2]  forces a consideration to counter-attack in kind. 
 
I like his tweets as most of them are justified like the Fake News tweets and the Crooked Hillary comments during the debates with Hillary on stage!!
 
Doesn't get much better than this. 
 
Run Cortez for the next leftist miracle- a belief in nonsense.
 
 
Bill Kamps Added Aug 16, 2018 - 3:36pm
opher: Trump is - he is undermining truth.
 
As did every President since my birth.  JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, etc.   All told lies as did the Presidents before them.  Part of life. 
 
The press has told lies as well as long as there has been a press.
 
Trump's style is a bit more in your face.  If you dont like his style just say so, but dont imply that others were more truthful. 
 
The press doesnt like being criticized, so they SAY their rights are being restricted.  No such thing is happening.  No laws are being proposed to restrict them.  They just dont like not having the last word. 
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 4:02pm
Bill K >> I hear many claims that Trump is interfering with the freedom of the press... He has done nothing to restrict their constitutional rights.
 
Exactly.  If anything, we're seeing proof the system still works.  The cry-baby press asserts that his criticism is dangerous and an attack on their rights.  Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
The fact is, the distortion we get from the legacy press is much more dangerous than anything Trump has said so far.  Today, the press is suffering a few middle fingers and verbal assaults, much less than Trumps staff and conservatives just trying to go about their daily lives.
 
All the press wants is for the criticism to stop and everybody go back to pretending they are the unquestionable prophets of the truth.  They aren't, never were, and it's about time they were called on it.
 
Bill K >> People avoid picking fights with the press because they "buy ink by the barrel and paper by the ton".
 
And for normal people that is very good advice.  Trump has found a way to circumvent them... good for him.  I hope to circumvent these hacks is the wave of the future.  They can preach in their little echo chambers as long as they can keep the lights on.  I bought my last buggy whip (newspaper) a long time ago.
 
Bill K >> There the Chronicle implies that because the press does some good, it must therefore be innocent of the claims made against them.
 
Yes... It's standard liberal logic and obfuscation.
 
Bill K >> Most organizations and people are not all bad or all good, and doing some good does not make them innocent of the bad.
 
The press is not always bad... some very good exposure and reporting has come from the press.  EABCs examples above for example.  But as with people and companies, and government... crowing about the good and denying the bad is not honest or healthy.
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 4:02pm
Opher >> Bill - Trump is - he is undermining truth...
 
TDS
 
"You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." -- Jesus Christ
 
Opher >> Tex - you must be joking if you think there isn't a conservative voice in the media.
 
Opher, where the hell are you getting that statement?  Are you reading the comments at all?  Here are three quotes from me in this thread...
 
"All sources are biased, and to be honest..." -- TL
 
"Yes, Fox is biased.  I (a conservative) see that." -- TL
 
"There are a few conservative sources here (Fox, Wall Street Journal, talk radio, internet sites...)" -- TL
 
Please tell me how I can make these statements AND have the opinion you just asserted?  You're getting as bad as Michka...
 
Now... I did say and stand by the statement... "but by volume it (conservative news sources) makes up a small percentage of the overall news media." That observation is as plain as stating the sun rises in the East.  Anyone who doesn't see that fact is beyond the reach of reason and intellectual honesty.  And there are a lot of people THAT unhinged out there…
 
Opher >> How right does America have to go before it falls off the edge into outright fascism?
 
"Fascism"? I see the one who hates labels (like TDS) is eager to throw them around himself.  Feel free to join back in the discussion or suit yourself and stomp around in Michka land.
 
Bill K >> The press doesnt like being criticized, so they SAY their rights are being restricted.  No such thing is happening.  No laws are being proposed to restrict them.  They just dont like not having the last word.
 
Bill... thank you.  You get it.
 
Benjamin Goldstein Added Aug 16, 2018 - 4:53pm
Recently, I read a propaganda piece from the Chinese news agency and I was surprised that it was not more sycophantic than the German press.
 
But Jim Acosta's feelings....wake me up when something's on!
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 5:06pm
Wendy B >> HA HA HA, A WOMAN OF COLOR HAS TAKEN OVER EVERY NEWS CHANNEL AND RIGHTFULLY SO,
 
Where did all these new Michka types come from?  Nothing coherent.  Nothing to do with the subject of the post... just drive by irrational YELLING.
 
Translation of this comment: "I hate Trump. You're all a bunch of racist.  Ha Ha..."  Ooops I mean "I HATE TRUMP.  YOU'RE ALL A BUNCH OF RACIST.  HA HA..."
 
Wendy B >> WHODDUH TAWT ARETHA'S DEATH WOULD STEAL DON THE CON'S NIT TWIT/TWITTER NONSENCE?
 
Aretha Franklin will indeed be missed.  Her talent and contribution to her art is undeniable.  I am grateful for her music and am comforted by her faith in her God and Jesus Christ.  I pray her family finds comfort in the same.
 
Wendy B >> TALK ABOUT POETIC JUSTICE!
 
I am assuming you are assuming that anybody not leftist is racist.  This speaks volumes about the content of YOUR character.  Feel free to join the discussion or just drive by and throw a little poo every now and then.
Flying Junior Added Aug 16, 2018 - 5:37pm
wsucram15 Added Aug 16, 2018 - 5:55pm
You know..I see people in favor of the press on here and people arguing against it.
It wont be very funny when you no longer have the right to do so or even have fist amendment rights.
There is much more to this newspaper stunt than you know. Go buy a damn paper for anyone you support. Investigative journalism on any topic, wars, government, legal, etc...is not cheap.
 
Also..I was in DC on inauguration day and ALL the papers that dont even support the current President, were supporting him that day. there were a few cheeky headlines, but ALL of them were in hopes at least.
I do believe the LA Times and Boston Globe were first to call him President.  Most of the correct headlines did not appear until the next day.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 16, 2018 - 6:48pm
Thanks for invite TexasLynn,
Oh wow, where to start?
Well since I did Aretha comment you sadly attacked as a leftist rant instead of an anti-Trump rant, I bring you FOX coverage of the amazing AF today: 
 
"Aretha Franklin fans say Fox News should have showed more R-E-S-P-E-C-T after it used an image of Patti LaBelle on Thursday in an image used to report Franklin’s death.
The error was caught by online observers who noticed that the picture at the end of the obit featured LaBelle singing “Over the Rainbow” during a “Women of Soul: In Performance at the White House” special, which aired on PBS in 2014."
 
OOPS, LYNN said Fox is biased but aha ha REALLY fake NEWS or
alternative is racist pigs wanted to purposely use wrong photo.
Please tell me which witch you see reported by Fox oh wise Lynn?
Dang Lynn, 
Hard to beat the Fox MESS so now repeated by 
https://www.thisisinsider.com/fox-news-mistake-aretha-franklin-patti-labelle-2018-8
 
Holy Cow Turds, imma gonna die after Sputnik also reports:
https://sputniknews.com/viral/201808171067255614-fox-news-patti-labelle-aretha-franklin/
Sputnik headline: "How do you honor the life and legacy of legendary singer Aretha Franklin? According to Fox News, just throw up a picture of Patti LaBelle!"
 
M'kay, enough, that is just too cruel for even a heathen like myself to continue search.
Cheers TexasLynn and folks,
~The Bug~
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:13pm
Guilt consumes so let me make Fox mess right using CBS
 
Former President Barack Obama, who was moved to tears during her 2015 Kennedy Center performance of "A Natural Woman," said the singer "helped define the American experience."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/aretha-franklin-death-stars-react-today-2018-08-16/
Sorry, just needed a better source and hallah NO Fox mention
Cheers! 
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:28pm
Jeanne,
Thanks for the comment...
 
Jeanne >> You know..I see people in favor of the press on here and people arguing against it.
 
I don't see anybody arguing “against” the press; just people pointing out the press is biased (a fact) and thus produces a poor product (another fact).  We aren't against it in that we want it to go away... just do a better job.  Right now, we would settle for mediocre.
 
Jeanne >> It wont be very funny when you no longer have the right to do so or even have fist amendment rights.
 
So?  Our First Amendments rights are in danger?  How?  Is the press the protector of those rights or is this a Trump the tyrant comment?  As has been noted, nobody has threatened the press (including the President) unless you count criticism a threat.  I consider public criticism an exercise of the First Amendment.
 
Jeanne >> There is much more to this newspaper stunt than you know.
 
How so?  To me it's a bunch of cry-babies saying the President talking bad about us is an attack on us and our rights.  And this coming from people who should know better… who use the First Amendment as their livelihood.
 
Jeanne >> Go buy a damn paper for anyone you support.
 
Agreed... I have a couple of digital subscriptions to publications.  None of those I support would have taken part in the Boston Globe's stunt (other than expose it for what it is).
 
I had a subscription to the Houston Chronicle for the first few years I lived in Houston, but soon canceled.  When asked why I did not support my local paper my response was "The same reason I don't send money to the Democratic National Committee or other organizations working against my interest."  It was funny that they kept delivering it even when I cancelled.  They needed to inflate their numbers for advertising.  A subscription was like a time-share… you couldn’t get out from under it.
 
I will admit, it does make me happy that producers of such shoddy products are struggling in the marketplace.  In that vein, it would fill me with glee if one (just one) of these “newspapers” would produce a product worth reading... worth my support.  I'll not hold my breath.  Good riddance to the lot of them.
 
Hopefully the media corpses will be an example of how not to do it... (hint... drop the bias).  Make room for somebody actually willing to do the job.
 
But… I agree in spirit; support those who produce a product you like; done support that which works against you.  Good advice for any product.
 
Jeanne >> I do believe the LA Times and Boston Globe were first to call him President.  Most of the correct headlines did not appear until the next day.
 
LMAO... a whole 24 hour "honeymoon". :)  That 7 years 364 days less than President Obama got. :)  Those guys were saints giving Trump such benefit of the doubt… :)
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:30pm
Wendy B >> Thanks for invite TexasLynn, Oh wow, where to start?
 
So, more drive by poo it is...
 
Fox News put up a wrong photo... THAT'S what you've got?
 
Put up an original thought on the actual subject or go troll somewhere else.  I would kind of like to keep my threads on point and clean of ... poo
 
Thanks you in advance.
TexasLynn Added Aug 16, 2018 - 7:37pm
FJ >> Now it's time to get out there and read a few op-eds from around the country. 
 
Thank you for the link... THIS is very useful and I plan on taking full advantage of it.  So for I've read that of the NYT and the Houston Chronicle.  So far, their argument is the same.  "The press does some good so you should it excuses the bad."
 
They both are wrong about Trumps criticism being dangerous.  Neither gives a breath of mention to the possibility of actual bias.  It's not intellectually honest for that simple fact.
 
A drunk can't get well until he knows he has a problem.  The press is a bunch of drunks.
 
Please, anyone who finds an article admitting bias OR admitting Trump has the right to criticize or even remotely from a conservative viewpoint... let us know.
 
Again, thanks for the link.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 16, 2018 - 8:05pm
Lynn,
Delete my comments like rilla why doncha'?
What a goofball
Batter UP!
William Stockton Added Aug 16, 2018 - 9:25pm
the explosion of unhinged prejudice for some and favoritism towards others emerged for all to see;
 
Tex, I would rather have seen you write about this recent "emerging" phenomena.  The cause.  This is what history books will contain 100 years from now.  This is the most important story and change for our culture . . . the downfall of mainstream biased news and what caused its departure from "balanced" or "fair" reporting.  I'd say they were never "balanced" or "fair".  They had a monopoly on the news and we the people were deaf to opposing voices.  As well, with a monopoly, they didn't need to be cut-throat competitively.  That has all changed now with the internet.  Trump had very little to do, directly, with the unhinging of MSN (mainstream news).  This has been going on for some time since 2001.  2016 was when the media just took off the gloves and masks seeing their demise eminent.
 
Trump is wrong to be so thin-skinned concerning every criticism.
 
Oh boy.  Trump has 99.5% negative press constantly.  24/7.  Trump does not respond to 90% of the negative shit out there.  Come on, dude!  Your lack of appreciation, and I do mean your understanding, of Trump's situation, is rather narrow.  Every day I am so impressed he can hold it together in spite of half the country out for his blood.  I couldn't do it and I have been through a lot of tough shit in my life.
 
 
This has never been more true than now; being more dangerous and subversive to our Republic than any current adversary or threat, foreign or domestic, real or trumped up.
 
No.  Main Stream News is over.  It is dying.  As it goes unhinged it might fly off and hurt people.  But this is only temporary and isolated.  Their reign of power is over, man.
 
Me?  I pray for a freer press . . . But she is long gone, and likely never to return to us.
 
No!  Just NO!  What are you talking about??  Your prayers have already been answered!!  The only reason the press has become unhinged is that of another source for news (INTERNET).  Main Stream News is in a downward spiral.  They and their 50-year-old reign of biased news is OVER.  I don't wish it to return . . . .EVER!
See, you want to think the corporate news was all that in the first place.  It wasn't.  You yourself stated this in your article.  But you whine about wanting that to return again . . . what the hell, Tex??  
Jeff Michka Added Aug 16, 2018 - 9:37pm
Don't worry, Bug, he will. like most other WB rightist patriots, delete when he has no defense and doesn't like what you say.  His dislike for me stems from his publishing at least two articles on how awful and unpatriotic those NFL players are, "disrespecting the flag and anthem,' of the same Nation he wrote an article about secession.  He wants out of the Union, but wants to be looked upon as a super patriot, not a traitor.  he wants to be a cheap, latter day "confederate' (traitors), But he has no explanation for his duplicity, so  you now (along with others) being 'Michka like" because you won't back down or away from his cheap rightist "patriotism."  He's been so serious about secession, he has Bumperstickers!!  A true threat to democracy, and a comment on how much TraitorLynn's "fellows" can understand.  How rightist.  The bumperstickers will make it easier to find cars and pickups belonging to the traitors, right before the missile fired from a drone comes through their windshield.
Ric Wells Added Aug 16, 2018 - 9:40pm
Jeff texaslynn is running scared and wants succession because it has been stated that by 2022 whites will be a minority in Texas. He can't stand it.
Jeff Michka Added Aug 16, 2018 - 10:04pm
It had to be something like that, Ric.  These are unreasonably frightened people.  They live in areas where there are, logically, going to be a lot of brown faces, yet fear them.  As I suggested to another rightist fearful of brown faces, living in California, he should move to somewhere in fly-over America, where white faces will greet them and give them a meal of the good white people, their national dish, pot roast and boiled vegetables in celebration of their "whiteness."  Yeah, they are afraid.  Look how they've treated minorities, so imagine what those former minorities will do as majorities, to them.  "Why do I have to sit at the back of the bus?"  "What do you mean I can't eat at this lunchcounter?"  "Why are you hanging me, that white woman was my wife?"  
Flying Junior Added Aug 17, 2018 - 12:01am
I copied it into MS-Word because that's the only way to do html with articles from the NYT.  Every contribution by every newspaper was in blue ink, underlined.
 
So I went back to my second free article on the NYT.  Every story, from every newspaper is hypertext that leads you to the article as offered by the original newspaper.
 
I mostly identified with the newspapers that proudly defend the hard work and the faithfulness that is their everyday bread and butter.
 
Of course, they are not the enemy of the people.  They are Americans, just like you and I.
wsucram15 Added Aug 17, 2018 - 12:52am
Lynn..I think the 24 hour thing is because everyone expected Hillary to win and the presses had run at many major news papers.  I believe I saw a headline saying Madam President.
So everyone had to redo the headlines. I could be wrong but I think that was the case.  LA Times I am pretty sure was first one with the correct announcement.
Does it matter who likes what?  You like Fox..someone else likes IDK..CNN.  To me they are both repetitive and take their news from the newspaper and investigative journalists on the street.
Its good you subscribe, not many people do. Keep reading.
Leroy Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:17am
"Of course, they are not the enemy of the people.  They are Americans, just like you and I."
 
The MSM who conspired with foreign nationals (namely Christoper Steele) to subvert the American election process and attempted to overthrow the duly elected president are guilty of treason in the dictionary sense of the word.  That is most of the MSM.  To the extent that it willfully participated in these events, it the enemy of the people.  To the extent that it just went along for the ride to avoid the wrath of the person whom it thought would be president, good riddance.  If it doesn't pursue all angles, I have no use for it.
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 8:34am
William >> This is the most important story and change for our culture . . . the downfall of mainstream biased news.
 
While I agree that some in mainstream news (many, many newspapers) are headed for a crash, I don't think all of it is.  Every partisan and special interest reports the impending demise of the opposition with regularity.  It happens, but very, very rarely.  Will this be one of those times... I'm doubtful but hope you're right.
 
William >> I'd say they were never "balanced" or "fair".  They had a monopoly on the news and we the people were deaf to opposing voices.
 
That is very true, especially in the days of just a few broadcast stations... then CNN (cable news) came along and also felt no competition and thus no inclination to change.
 
The internet is the key... hey will either adapt to it or perish because of it.
 
William >> Trump had very little to do, directly, with the unhinging of MSN (mainstream news).
 
I would disagree to an extent.  You are correct that the media would have been biased against ANY non-liberal... but I think Trump took the cake for (and from) them.  If any other GOP candidate had one the animus would have been there; but not to this scale.
 
William >> This has been going on for some time since 2001. 
 
And even well before that.
 
William >> 2016 was when the media just took off the gloves and masks seeing their demise eminent.
 
On that... we can agree.
 
William >> Oh boy.  Trump has 99.5% negative press constantly.  24/7.
 
And on that we can agree.  The TDS is incomprehensible.
 
William >> Trump does not respond to 90% of the negative shit out there.
 
If for no other reason than sheer volume.
 
William >> Come on, dude!  Your lack of appreciation, and I do mean your understanding, of Trump's situation, is rather narrow.
 
I think I understand his situation (and it's not fair what he has to put up with from the media); and I do defend him when he's right which is quite often.  BUT I don't pretend he is without flaws; some of them serious.
 
William >> No (not an enemy of the people).  Main Stream News is over.  It is dying.  ...  Their reign of power is over, man.
 
Well, Trump agrees with me on the enemy part and with you and the reign being over part.  I think mass disinformation campaigns (especially from within the nation) is always a danger to any Republic.  Even if their reign is fading, it's not over yet and will be a long, slow, thrashing death in which they will do much damage.
 
William >> No!  Just NO!  What are you talking about??  Your prayers have already been answered!!
 
Not yet... you claim they will be... but not yet. 
 
And the likes of Google, Facebook, etc... could even dampen that.  Even if the Internet has great sources of information; if the masses continue to be force fed crap by the likes of the social media giants, society still loses.  The few well informed still lose.
 
You are right in that corporate news was never unbiased and agree it is something we would never aspire to return to.  They are indeed on their way out, but likely only to be replaced by something just as bad.
 
Let me say that I was using a bit of poetic license in that last point... like a love lost.  A literal "return" would not be desirable.
 
Thanks for the comments.
William Stockton Added Aug 17, 2018 - 9:34am
They are indeed on their way out, but likely only to be replaced by something just as bad.
 
Writing an article about this, Tex.  Posting shortly.  Good discussion.
 
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 10:31am
Flying J >> I mostly identified with the newspapers that proudly defend the hard work and the faithfulness that is their everyday bread and butter.
 
I don't mean to imply that newspapers (and the legacy media in general) don't produce anything of value.  They do.
 
The point of just about every editorial is to point out what of value is there and then apply that value via osmosis to the rest of the "reporting".  It's like saying a man keeps his word 90% of the time so therefore he's completely trustworthy.  AND any pointing out of that 1 time (out of 10) is slander against the 9 times he did the right thing.
 
It's shell game logic, at best.
 
What I am saying is that when dealing with anything political, there is almost always leftist bias there and with many it is beyond the pale.
 
As a whole, the legacy media (including just about EVERY ONE of these newspapers) distorts the truth because of this bias.  This tendency holds one side of the political spectrum accountable and gives dam near free reign to propaganda and corruption on the other side of the political spectrum.
 
Such actions and results are a threat to threat to the Republic... thus the appropriate label "enemy of the people".
 
Flying J >> Of course, they are not the enemy of the people.  They are Americans, just like you and I.
 
American and "enemy of the people" are not mutually exclusive.  Any combination of the two is possible.  On the whole the legacy media is both.
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 10:53am
Jeanne >> Lynn..I think the 24 hour thing is because everyone expected Hillary to win
 
Sure... just about everybody expected that, including me. (I know, I know… some of you saw it coming).
 
The main point from my perspective is that there was zero "honeymoon" for President Trump.  The press went into attack mode from day one.  There was very little news and an abundance of hysterical editorializing masquerading as news right off the bat.  It continues today well over a year later and will never subside.
 
Jeanne >> So everyone had to redo the headlines. I could be wrong but I think that was the case.  LA Times I am pretty sure was first one with the correct announcement.
 
This is likely true... but has little to do with hysterical bias that followed.  Stating the truth that Trump won is hardly something to be patted on the back for.
 
Jeanne >> Does it matter who likes what?  You like Fox..someone else likes IDK..CNN. 
 
Yes, it does matter.  Because one is more intellectually honest and closer to the truth than the other.  We may not be able to agree on which one that is... but that does not negate an objective truth.
 
Jeanne >> To me they are both repetitive and take their news from the newspaper and investigative journalists on the street.
 
Absolutely, and sometimes doing their own investigation.  Again, production of some value does not negate the times you produce crap and why you produce it.
 
None of the good stuff takes away from the fact that bias exists within the reporting.  Fox may strip it out, CNN may add to it (or vice versa).  It's a key ingredient of the product that reduces the quality.  There should be consequences for choosing to do that… like… being called out on it.
 
Jeanne >> Its good you subscribe, not many people do. Keep reading.
 
I doubt you would be impressed with my paid subscriptions.  But I do believe in putting my money where my mouth is.  Quality publications deserve financial support.  Let the marketplace of ideas pick the winners and losers.
 
Thank you for the comments…
Bill H. Added Aug 17, 2018 - 11:11am
 
Trump was in the attack mode from day one of his campaign. Any journalist that asked him a question that he would interpret as negative to his ego would result in an insult. We all witnessed this many times.
Trump pretty much created his negative press situation and continues to throw fuel on the fire. He actually seems to enjoy creating even more controversy as to step up the criticism even more. His latest efforts to stifle free speech by pulling security clearances from past top intelligence officials is something that even diehard Trump supporters should question. But of course, Fox News has and will continue to support him on this one.
So free speech is good when it is positive toward Trump, but is unacceptable when it is negative toward Trump?
 
William Stockton Added Aug 17, 2018 - 11:27am
Any journalist that asked him a question that he would interpret as negative to his ego would result in an insult.
 
Bill H -- what is your excuse?
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 17, 2018 - 11:57am
Bill H.
 
"Trump was in the attack mode from day one of his campaign. Any journalist that asked him a question that he would interpret as negative to his ego would result in an insult. We all witnessed this many times."
 
And popular and for good causes. Hillary is a liar, thief, and criminal and should have been humiliated when she 'ran' as a simple stooge. Billy the Bimbo Banger is no better. Bernie and Cortez just degrade themselves with nonsense about social program costs. 
 
The FBI  is full of criminals who should all be fired and many should do hard time for obstruction of justice, corruption, falsifying government documents and lying under oath .
 
Trump correctly blasts these parasites and most of America is with him clapping as the progressive criminals get fired or get jail time. 
 
I celebrate all attacks against the criminal elements of the progressives. 
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 11:59am
Bill H >> Trump pretty much created his negative press situation ...
 
Sorry Bill, completely wrong.  The negative press situation in relation to the GOP has existed since Regan (well before that actually).
 
Dan Rather (CBS) and his producers invented a scandal out of thin air to try and tank Bush's re-election.  It was so bad it eventually cost all of them (including Dan Rather) their jobs.  I still remember the signs "Rather Biased" from that fiasco.  It often had a big CBS eye logo.  (The ingredient missing from this fiasco?  Trump)
 
Before that his father George Sr had a very popular slogan that read "Annoy the Media, Re-Elect Bush".
 
The press hysteria displayed during the Regan years?  Very hysterical.  The press asserted Reagan was inept and about to start a nuclear war with the U.S.S.R... instead, he won the cold war.  Sound familiar?
 
So... NO... this negative press situation has been around well before Trump and is COMPLETELY the fault of the press.  There is nothing new here.
 
Bill H >> So free speech is good when it is positive toward Trump, but is unacceptable when it is negative toward Trump?
 
Of course not... BUT when EVERTHING is a scandal (as the media depicts with Trump)... the people quickly conclude none of it is.  It's the boy who cried wolf syndrome in spades.  Then you guys on the left wring your hands over "Why doesn't anybody take any of this seriously".
 
The funny thing is how the media has shackled itself.  There are indeed many legitimate criticisms of Trump but since the media chose a model of hysterical overdrive 27/7 they can’t even get people to take seriously the stuff that should be taken seriously.  Meaning… when there’s a wolf really there, the media has screwed itself with all the hyped crap it’s pushed, and nobody listens.
 
Unfortunately, most of your comment is simply TDS (which is shared by the legacy media). 
 
Trump is evil, Trump is to blame, Look a Trump scandal, That thing Trump did is unprecedented, I hate Trump, Why aren't you smart enough to hate Trump too... Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump…
 
AND the public reaction to the 10,000th assertion that Trump is a wolf?  Yaaaaawwwnnnn...
 
TDS?  To date, I've seen no cure.
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 12:37pm
Leroy >> If it doesn't pursue all angles, I have no use for it.
 
Bam!  Exactly!  The extraordinary scrutiny the press applies to all things GOP and conservative is fine (minus the invented stuff) by me.  If the press would just apply that same scrutiny to all things Dem and liberal then they would go a long way in righting the vast wrongs they inflict upon the people of this nation.
 
In a sense it's poetic that had they done that Hillary Clinton would never have run for President.  She would likely have been too busy serving year 2 or 3 of her prison sentence.  Had that been the case, the Dems might have had a viable candidate to run against Trump... But they made their bed and are now screaming bloody murder for having to sleep in it. :)
Bill H. Added Aug 17, 2018 - 12:55pm
So I take it you support his latest fiasco of pulling security clearances of those who may not agree with him?
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 1:22pm
Bill H >> So I take it you support his latest fiasco of pulling security clearances of those who may not agree with him?
 
Which is the TDS version of another hyped up nothing-burger; yet another wolf when nothing is there.
 
To voice my exact position... I support security clearances for those whose jobs (within the government) make them necessary.  I support revoking those clearances when one is no longer in those positions or advising those in those positions.  I also support the revoking of security clearances of those who have proven they are compromised (regardless of job status), like Peter Strzok and Bruce Ohr.  They should be demoted or better yet fired to go find other (less security clearance requiring) jobs.
 
Security clearance?  It’s not a right and it’s at the discretion of the Commander in Chief.  It’s a rule of law kinda thing.
Bill Kamps Added Aug 17, 2018 - 2:57pm
So I take it you support his latest fiasco of pulling security clearances of those who may not agree with him?
 
The people we are discussing serve at the pleasure of the President. Not only does he have the right to revoke their clearance, he has the right to fire them, just because he wants to. 
 
People who are former employees, really should not have security clearances at all, for what purpose? how would they see classified information if they no longer have those jobs? 
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 3:14pm
Bill K >> People who are former employees, really should not have security clearances at all, for what purpose?
 
I have heard it stated that some high-level DOJ employees have in the past continued to advise those who took over their positions.  This however was generally requested and agreed upon during the transition.  Under those circumstances I might understand keeping that clearance.
 
No such circumstances exist in these cases.  Yes, I'm sure others have kept their clearances in the past and in some way have cashed in on it.  Security Clearance is a commodity in the marketplace.  This clearly falls into the category of... immaterial.
 
Many of those named have political axes to grind which may entice them to divulge information they shouldn’t.  This alone should be enough to revoke their clearance.  All have shown at a minimum questionable judgment and conflict of interest.  Another had an extra-marital affair that made him susceptible to blackmail.  Under DOJ rules, his clearances could have been revoked once this was discovered AND without question should have once conspiratorial and compromising texts were discovered.
 
But no, no, this is all Trumps fault.  He's a unreasonable vindictive bastard.  Why can't everyone just see that? <sarcasm emoji>
Bill Kamps Added Aug 17, 2018 - 3:23pm
I have heard it stated that some high-level DOJ employees have in the past continued to advise those who took over their positions. 
 
If they aren't paid in these consulting roles, and therefore not employees, then yes I would agree also.  They have a reason to have the clearance. 
 
Clearances probably have been cashed in on, and I dont think it is a good idea, but as you say not a big deal. 
 
Just because the President does something people dont agree with, does not mean anyone's rights have been violated. 
 
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 17, 2018 - 4:03pm
Why should we let former employees monetize their clearances??
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 4:15pm
RJFKD >> Why should we let former employees monetize their clearances??
 
I'm not saying we should. I'm noting that it has happened in the past under various administrations AND that this fact is immaterial to the issue at hand.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 17, 2018 - 4:39pm
TexasLynn
 
This fact IS material to the current discussion:
 
"Many of those named have political axes to grind which may entice them to divulge information they shouldn’t.  This alone should be enough to revoke their clearance."
 
Such clearances should be cancelled when people fall outside the category of Need to Know. Why risk security breaches. Many previous administrations made horrible mistakes with secret information. 
TexasLynn Added Aug 17, 2018 - 5:09pm
rJFKD, I think we're actually in agreement here.  I'm just saying past mistakes do not justify allowing the same or bigger mistakes today.
 
That's the way we've always done it will be presented as proof that Trump is just picking on those poor misunderstood ex-DOJ adversaries.  That argument should never be the justification for anything; in my opinion.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Aug 17, 2018 - 5:29pm
TexasLynn
 
"rJFKD, I think we're actually in agreement here.  I'm just saying past mistakes do not justify allowing the same or bigger mistakes today."
 
I agree and we should not just allow former government employees to retain such privileges after they no longer need them. 
 
This gets us to the concept of the Elder Statesman, a person, who, we must presume, has been through several offices and won many campaigns and now rates a grand title such as Priscus as in the context of  the Roman world. 
 
We let our system go stale by not promoting new people while retaining those with many years of 'service' thus  diluting the talent pool with outdated people and ideas. Our system seems to hold onto people even if the make huge mistakes and that allows them to make more of the same kind. 
 
This is related to the notion of term limits so we get rid of older ideas and get fresh meat into the game. [This is an oblique stab at Bernie]
Leroy Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:09pm
I find it incredible that former communist sympathizers such as Com(m)ey ever had security clearance to begin with.  And how could someone who voted for a communist ever be hired by the CIA much less rise to the position of Director such as Brennon?  And why is the government hiring communist sympathizers such as Nellie Ohr and how in the hell did her husband ever rise to the number 4 position in the DOJ.  We might as well scrap the FBI and DOJ.  We should at least strip all former employees of their security clearance.  I assume that if they have security clearance they can discuss classified information with active employees.  That makes them extraordinarily value to private companies.   They are essentially free to trade on inside information.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:28pm
TexasLynn,
 
Forget Fox news or any mainstream media and consider any source, person, or other entity that speaks against Trump will be subject to silence. THAT is a fact and challenged by agency of service members, patriots to our country liked or not liked. To spit on service members of any agency within America is same as spitting on troops returning from Vietnam. An unjust WAR indeed but DRAFT took place also!
 
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/top-former-intelligence-bosses-speak-out-in-favor-of-brennan/
 
They all agree that POTUS action had nothing to do with WHO should hold security clearances and everything to do with an attempt to stifle "FREE SPEECH"
Stomping on first amendment comes in many forms and Trump is plainly disaffected by Constitution he never read or can understand.
He wants to be a dictator and as an "Apprentice" right NOW must be stopped. You either defend Constitution or NOT Lynn, which is it?
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:32pm
Fox News yesterday again,
Makes this classic statement: "Ainsley Earhardt proudly remembers the time that the United States "defeated communist Japan," proving we are truly a Great country."
 
Response to stupidity or LIE Lynn, I'll wait?
 
Hi Ainsley, little history for you: Japan was a monarchy during the war. And do you know what else (this will surely blow your tiny brain) : Communists were our allies !
Sincerely,
Literate America
 
Leroy Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:34pm
'They all agree that POTUS action had nothing to do with WHO should hold security clearances and everything to do with an attempt to stifle "FREE SPEECH"'
 
How does revoking security clearance stifle free speech?  Using your logic, my free speech is stifled because I don't have a security clearance.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:40pm
Emperor (figure head over Military) is reason I use Monarchy with Ainsley, better clarity than such a deep rooted culture as that of Japan.
 
They closed the gates and America demanded they let us in eh?
 
What WE always do is bully others into submission and it gets really OLD doncha'know' <best Sarah Palin impression>
Leroy Added Aug 17, 2018 - 6:53pm
If the press were the enemy of the people, their presence might inspire fear in the residents.  That is exactly what happened recently at a Town Hall meeting.  The press was excluded because the event organizer she didn't think the participants would "feel safe."  
Jeff Michka Added Aug 17, 2018 - 7:21pm
Rightists like TraitorLynn go on and on about frIeedoms, but want those "evil bastards" in the press to only report what rightists want to hear.  That's why Fixed Noise is in business.  And for any that really care, how many subscribe /(you know, pay) for a newspaper?  Since the early 80s, MBAs have ruled newsrooms, and to the joy of rightists, no longer have staffs that could investigate say, Watergate.  And newsrooms demand reporters use "E-journalism" to investigate and write stories.  So tell us, rightists, just how many online sources of news and information are there for a reporter to tap?
Bill H. Added Aug 17, 2018 - 7:34pm
Having had a TS clearance for many years, I believe it is a dumb move to strip a person of their clearance, especially with the knowledge of most likely tons of information that is still classified.
Wendy Bugliari Added Aug 17, 2018 - 8:28pm
Oh contraire Dear Bill,
When it comes to hiring family members who LIE over 50 times the Sarah puppet stated CLEARLY it was NOT a White House issue. Blamed Obama for Flynn knowing who made him resign, warned by Sally Yates NOT to choose FLYNN (helping Trump indeed as duty required her to) and she gets fired, 
Comey gets fired for NOT dropping Flynn issue, WTF was FBI supposed to do? THEN you would blame FBI for not protecting
him from positing a compromised man!
 
OMG and LMFAO, CALL THIS shit what it is.
Smells like shit, steps like shit, throws like a monkey, lol
Ya just gotta be kiddin us now Tex!
NO more, enough nonsense, delete me as you like
Cheers,
~The Bug~
Bill H. Added Aug 18, 2018 - 12:15am
It's no secret that I have despised Trump even before he announced his latest run for President. I had thought maybe he would get his act together within a short time if he did happen to get elected, but it became obvious within his first week in office that he was only using his position to bolster his ego even more than it has been historically.
Based on his latest blunder, I am totally convinced that not only is his ego going way overboard, but he is also showing signs of early dementia and total loss of any compassion whatsoever (if he had any to begin with). He apparently has no knowledge or respect whatsoever for our Constitution, and as usual is only looking out for himself and (what is left) of his cronies and offshore banking buds.
Trumpies - I know you will support this guy until the rising of the mushroom clouds, but maybe if you look at the big picture, you will at least get an idea of why I have this opinion. To me, this latest retaliation against those who disagree with him is totally unacceptable.
Flying Junior Added Aug 18, 2018 - 4:41am
Pardero and Lynn,
 
I'll be  monkey's uncle,  I was sure that I had caught The Daily Caller in an outright lie, but upon closer reading, their information was factual and reasonable.
 
There is a popular RW meme out there now about how the Media Coalition including NYT, BuzzFeed, CNN and other outlets have called for the release of the names and addresses of the jurors before a verdict has been reached.  Yes the coalition has called for their names but not to be released before the verdict is rendered.
 
The Daily Caller kept coming up.  I was sure I would bust them.  But on closer inspection, the kernel of truth was undeniably there.
 
http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/17/cnn-nyt-manafort-jury-names-addresses/
 
“Here, there is no reason to believe that extraordinary circumstances exist that would justify keeping jurors’ names sealed — particularly after they have rendered their verdict,” reads the motion.
 
“This is not a case involving organized crime or other circumstances in which the potential for violence or corruption requires an anonymous jury.”
 
This is a factual representation of the motion filed, as is corroborated by one of the trusted sources of news in print.
 
https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article216878560.html
 
Very impressive, indeed.
Pardero Added Aug 18, 2018 - 8:48am
Flying Junior,
DC is old fashioned real journalism. Maybe that is why they seem cutting edge, it is all too rare.
Leroy Added Aug 18, 2018 - 11:14am
I suppose that the judge in the trial being placed under federal protection due to death threats is no reason to believe that the jurors won't similarly be harassed.
 
Note: I don't see where there is any promise of non-disclosure of juror names until after the verdict, only that it should be less of a problem, with which I agree.  Who trusts the press these days?  No doubt the press wants to be able to scrutinize the background of the jurors in case they render a not guilty verdict or be able to contact them for interviews if they render a guilty verdict.  No doubt the press will harass the jurors if there is a not guilty verdict.  Under the circumstances of death threats to the judge and the unworthiness of the press, it would seem prudent to keep the names sealed for a few months until the fervor dies down.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Aug 19, 2018 - 12:07pm
The saving grace of American media is the free market. There is some competition, too little, but some. And some are heading downhill. In Europe you can bet that the governments will step in to "rescue" the papers and TV Corporations with tax dollars for the sake of "democracy." And because "democracy" they will only report favorably for the government.
Jeff Michka Added Aug 19, 2018 - 4:30pm
There have been Americans advocating the Government "save" newspapers (Robert McChesney), and think it a bad idea for obvious reasons.  Newspaper and other media even consider not reporting a potential snow storm since fewer people will go to stores-their source of income-so how would that affect covering government as a news item?  "Be nice or they'll cut funding" is all too Trumpian. 
TexasLynn Added Aug 22, 2018 - 1:43pm
As we are hopefully well aware of by now... (FJ)... there were NO conservative editorials concerning the legacy medias attack on Trump last Thursday... because there are practically no conservative editors working in the news industry.
 
With that in mind... the Daily Caller (mentioned above) was kind enough to call them out.  As usual, they hit the nail on the head.  Here is a link to their article.
 
NATION’S EDITORS UNIONIZE FAKE NEWS
 
"What they clearly don’t understand — or, more likely, don’t want the American people to understand — is that when President Trump attacks the fake news media, he is not attacking all news media. He is simply calling out the pseudo-journalists and partisan publications in the mainstream media that spread fake news." -- Harlan Hill, Daily Caller
Rick W. Added Aug 22, 2018 - 4:00pm
Late comment, probably weird and unprovable, but here goes.
 
I (sincerely) wonder if much of the modern shift in journalism is due to economic pressures, rather than mass conspiracies. The marketplace is so segmented, it seems you have to appeal to a rabid base to survive, rather than simply report to a general audience. Most of the country has liberal values, so many liberal media outlets can hold on. (Most liberals don't vote, but they do watch TV.) Fox has the conservatives (who are a more reliable voting bloc). Then there are a thousand podcasts, YouTube channels, and other outlets. I listen to some. They're fun. But they're myopic, and I know it. I just find the other side so repellent at this point, I don't care anymore. I enjoy my cheerleaders.
 
All that said... we know about Trump's payoffs because two guys at the WSJ pursued a story their bosses said to drop. We know about Manafort because WSJ/NYT and others pursued it, despite serious threats from powerful people. We know about Cohen because people at the DOJ pursued it, even though they report to a Trump appointee. We didn't learn about any of this from Fox or MSNBC or any TV network. It was real journalists and lawyers, not people who sit for makeup every morning, who did the real work here. If there are a few good people left, doing the real work, we can recover from all this, as a country. Right now... I'd say it's a close call.
TexasLynn Added Aug 22, 2018 - 5:22pm
RW >> Late comment, probably weird and unprovable, but here goes.
 
Better late than never...
 
RW >> I (sincerely) wonder if much of the modern shift in journalism is due to economic pressures, rather than mass conspiracies.
 
I don't see the problem with modern journalism as a mass conspiracy so much as the type of people who gravitate to the profession and the teaching of journalism tend to be to the left.  Over the decades this tendency got worse because more and more conservatives realized they were not welcome and would be penalized by their peers.  It was like a continual drip that wore away a stone.
 
The same can be said of professions like University professors... and government bureaucrats.
 
RW >> The marketplace is so segmented, it seems you have to appeal to a rabid base to survive, rather than simply report to a general audience.
 
I don't buy that.  I would pay good money for an objective source.  It's a product I want but can't find.
 
But, I agree that a conservative newspaper would not last very long in a large city (as a liberal one would not last in a small city/town).  But all these liberal newspapers are just slowly bleeding out from the collective holes they've shot in their foot.
 
I am a veracious reader of news and current events.  In the early 90s when I lived in Houston, I subscribed to the Houston Chronicle.  If was to the left but I could tolerate it.  But as the years went by it got worse and worse and worse in its bias.  By the early 2000s I gave up and canceled my subscription never to return.  I'll bet almost every conservative in Houston did the same.  We may not have been 50% of the subscribers... but we were enough to where that paper just lingers on and on... slowly dying.  This happened in every city across the nation. 
 
And... good riddance in my opinion to the lot of them.  For what they have done to their profession, they deserve it.  I’m sorry the handful that take the professional obligation seriously but the greater good is for these companies to die and go away.
 
RW >> Most of the country has liberal values, so many liberal media outlets can hold on.
 
Only if you count moderates as liberal... and I do; since the only difference between a moderate and a liberal is a slight pause while the pang of conscience passes. :)
 
That also depends on urban/rural, north/south and a lot of other factors. 
 
RW >> I just find the other side so repellent at this point, I don't care anymore. I enjoy my cheerleaders.
 
I'm there... but insist that I not isolate myself.  It may cause heartburn and a bit of yelling at my radio, but I still listen to NPR on a regular basis.  I turn in to the XM Radio Progress station every now and then, but that vein in my neck needs a breather every now and then.  I can only imagine the vision of me driving down the road when NPR is playing.  “This is morning edition…”
 
RW >> All that said... we know about Trump's (this that and the other).
 
Yay for those who go out and get that stuff.  They are truly the watchdogs of the society... and it's 90% one-sided. 
 
Sure, every now and then they'll break a story that targets someone on the left (i.e. Hillary's servers) ... but not often and it rarely goes anywhere (i.e. Hillary's servers).  And THATs the problem IMO.
 
The legacy media should not slack up on Trump or the GOP or conservatives one bit (except when they lie and omit which is often); but they should apply the same standard to the left and they don't... not by a long shot.
 
RW >> If there are a few good people left, doing the real work, we can recover from all this, as a country.
 
There will always be a few of those types in any industry.  But when the industry itself becomes this corrupt, reform is not easy and not likely.  That is where the legacy media finds itself today.
 
Would I like to see the recovery of a free press (not beholden to ideology)... absolutely.  Do I expect it... no, not in my lifetime.
 
Thanks for the comment.
Rick W. Added Aug 23, 2018 - 10:48am
TL>I don't see the problem with modern journalism as a mass conspiracy so much as the type of people who gravitate to the profession and the teaching of journalism tend to be to the left. 
 
Maybe chicken and egg? Not debating -- of course most journalism schools today are liberal. They weren't always. Not sure when things changed. They feed grads into a system that hires them... wonder if the big shift happened in the Nixon-era 70s, or if it goes back to McCarthy-era 50s? I'm thinking particularly of the professors. As college kids of the 80s, most of our profs got their PhDs in the 60s, and grew up in the 50s -- so that was our influence. It's a long echo.
 
TL>I don't buy that.  I would pay good money for an objective source.  It's a product I want but can't find.
 
I think there you're confusing your (intelligent, ethical) self with the (moronic, thieving) public. I've no doubt you would be a paying customer. I'm unconvinced enough other people would be to sustain a business, when there's more exciting stuff for free (via theft or paid advertising), which of course influences publishers. The click-bait headlines I see on otherwise reasonable articles today are particularly irritating.
 
TL>Only if you count moderates as liberal...
 
What I meant was, the majority of Americans have liberal social values (legalization of weed, support of gay marriage, access to abortion, etc). This is where the Venn diagram of liberal and moderate overlap, and this combined blue-purple group is 2/3 - 3/4 of the country. Still, moderates disagree with liberals on most economic and military issues.
 
TL>Hillary's servers
 
Maybe you guys should build the wall out of Hillary's servers, cuz you just don't seem to be able to get over them. *rim shot* :)
The Burghal Hidage Added Aug 24, 2018 - 10:52am
I once cited the "press" in an article as the fifth estate. I was corrected and reminded "no, no....it's the fourth estate!"
 
No. I said what I meant. Fourth estate becomes a fifth column and voila: they are the fifth estate