Lessons for the press...

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Advice for the press from a cognitive scientist-

How the media should respond to Trump’s lies

‘If you’re someone who shares Trump’s worldview, there are certain things that follow from that worldview. In other words, certain things have to be true, or have to be believed, in order to sustain that worldview. The things that aren’t actually true but nevertheless preserve that worldview are “alternative facts” — that’s what Conway was getting at, whether she knew it or not.

The conservatives use those alternative facts all the time, and so does Trump. If he’s talking to his base, he’s talking to people who have already bought into a picture of the world, and his job is to tell them things that confirm that picture — and he knows they’ll believe it for that very reason.

I think we have to understand “alternative facts” in this way, and understand that when Trump is lying, he’s lying in ways that register with his audience. So it may be lying, but it’s strategic lying — and it’s effective.’
 

jgarden

Senior Veteran
Jan 1, 2004
10,695
3,181
✟106,405.00
Faith
Methodist
Lessons for the press...

While "The Donald" has expressed unwavering support for the 2nd Amendment, he has demonstrated only scorn for the 1st Amendment - which he has attempted to dismiss as "fake news" for the past 2 years!

The role of a free press is to hold politicians accountable, particularly during those rare occasions when one political party controls all 3 branches of government - negating the traditional constitutional checks and balances!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tom 1
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How do 'alternative facts' measure up with false narratives?

Well it’s worth taking a look at. Clearly the papers that take a lot of flak from the WH, NYT, WAPO etc do get things wrong sometimes - errors or investigative pieces that take a different turn the original idea gets lost in etc - but not that often. Someone posted a few examples on another thread, there aren’t that many, given the overall volume of news. I read some conservative news sites also and they aren’t any different - The Hill seems ok, although they get things wrong occasionally too, Breitbart and similar sites just seem to be staffed by people with a penchant for random, unsubstantiated ranting. What comes out of the WH though - the tweets and the speeches - regularly contains demonstrably false information and ideas. The guy in this article has a point - the press should stop playing into it by publishing whatever Trump says, or tweets.
If you’ve got some specific examples of published articles you consider to be false narratives it would be interesting to have a look though.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well it’s worth taking a look at. Clearly the papers that take a lot of flak from the WH, NYT, WAPO etc do get things wrong sometimes - errors or investigative pieces that take a different turn the original idea gets lost in etc - but not that often.
It’s often enough and not just with Trump. They have done so for previous Republican administrations but this one is special for them. For an entire year there was little mention of how well the economy turned around. That’s withholding information.

When positive information is withheld for more mundane news like a Tweet that is a concerted effort to keep a negative news cycle. In some cases the effort has been hysterical considering you had to throw Snickers bars at the MSM to even have them admit the previous President was less than perfect.

The incomplete or false narratives from the MSM is quite frankly unprofessional journalism. The same investigative journalists who have several pieces to share since November 2016 were noticeably silent in the 8 years previous when that administration also did not have clean hands.

So I’m no fan of the Twitter wars as I believe it diminishes the office of POTUS, but given the proclivity of the MSM to back Democrats and dish it out to Republicans in office, frankly I can’t blame Trump for going to Twitter to communicate his policies and grievances.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: creslaw
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lessons for the press...

While "The Donald" has expressed unwavering support for the 2nd Amendment, he has demonstrated only scorn for the 1st Amendment - which he has attempted to dismiss as "fake news" for the past 2 years!

The role of a free press is to hold politicians accountable, particularly during those rare occasions when one political party controls all 3 branches of government - negating the traditional constitutional checks and balances!
And who holds a biased press accountable? It should be we the people but all of the news outlets are powerful communications corporations with a $$$ bottom line. They all keep merging and we will have a situation where the media becomes oligarchs beholden to the richest Americans like Bezos or foreigners alike.

And the “money changing” is getting worse. Political campaigns buy media time for campaign ads. That money goes to these giant news/media conglomerates and then that money is then shared with foundations which refill the political campaigns.

Plus don’t see how Trump or his administration is curtailing the First Amendment. He nor does the government control the media outlets and any journalist who is denied a seat at a White House press conference can easily go on the air and let his or her opinion be heard. As far as I can see when I flip around the various news sites and also websites, there seems to be no muzzle on what journalists have to say about the President.

Add to this no one has a right to be in a White House press conference. In fact the White House communications office does not have to run them. Previous administrations saw them as opportunities to get their message out unfiltered to a large section of the media while being televised so people can judge for themselves. When you have reporters shouting down and interrupting the press secretary or President it defeats the purpose of having a presser.

So please explain how First Amendment rights are being curtailed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: creslaw
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What comes out of the WH though - the tweets and the speeches - regularly contains demonstrably false information and ideas.
Which amounts to campaign rhetoric. Things like “you can keep your doctor” when selling Obamacare is right up there too. That was a flat out lie which affected families. But that was a sticking point for a lot of Americans. They wanted affordable healthcare but wanted the freedom to keep their doctor or the freedom to choose their doctor. Therefore, Obama sold that line to make the Affordable Healthcare Act palatable.

Also what are you categorizing as false information? Calling refugee caravans “invasions?” I would not call that false information. Ill advised rhetorical speech yes. When it comes to reporting things on the economy and labor figures the Administration has only repeated what government reports show. When the administration called the Trump dossier “fake” I think that was closer to the truth than others who peddled it as credible.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It’s often enough and not just with Trump. They have done so for previous Republican administrations but this one is special for them. For an entire year there was little mention of how well the economy turned around. That’s withholding information.

When positive information is withheld for more mundane news like a Tweet that is a concerted effort to keep a negative news cycle. In some cases the effort has been hysterical considering you had to throw Snickers bars at the MSM to even have them admit the previous President was less than perfect.

The incomplete or false narratives from the MSM is quite frankly unprofessional journalism. The same investigative journalists who have several pieces to share since November 2016 were noticeably silent in the 8 years previous when that administration also did not have clean hands.

So I’m no fan of the Twitter wars as I believe it diminishes the office of POTUS, but given the proclivity of the MSM to back Democrats and dish it out to Republicans in office, frankly I can’t blame Trump for going to Twitter to communicate his policies and grievances.

There’s positive info about the economy in the news Trump cites as fake, e.g here from last month’s NYT: U.S. Economy Charged Ahead in the Third Quarter
U.S. Economy Charged Ahead in the Third Quarter

There’s analysis also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...a8946a-e695-11e8-b8dc-66cca409c180_story.html

Which I think is fair enough. There does seem to be quite a split in reporting there, moreso than in Europe. Some of the press here leans left or right also but there it seems more extreme - but I have to say I find the quality of reporting, as in how things are presented and how well they try to back up what they are saying, to just be of better quality in the centre and left outlets. The Hill I think is a quality source - I think that is more conservative leaning? But it’s hard to take some seriously, like Breitbart, as they just seem to print personal rants with little attempt to substantiate what is being asserted.

I can’t comment on how the last administration was covered, as it just seemed like ‘business as usual’, I didn’t pay much attention. I remember that the press didn’t pull any punches when covering Clinton’s various shenanigans though.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There’s positive info about the economy in the news Trump cites as fake, e.g here from last month’s NYT: U.S. Economy Charged Ahead in the Third Quarter
U.S. Economy Charged Ahead in the Third Quarter

There’s analysis also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...a8946a-e695-11e8-b8dc-66cca409c180_story.html

Which I think is fair enough. There does seem to be quite a split in reporting there, moreso than in Europe. Some of the press here leans left or right also but there it seems more extreme - but I have to say I find the quality of reporting, as in how things are presented and how well they try to back up what they are saying, to just be of better quality in the centre and left outlets. The Hill I think is a quality source - I think that is more conservative leaning? But it’s hard to take some seriously, like Breitbart, as they just seem to print personal rants with little attempt to substantiate what is being asserted.

I can’t comment on how the last administration was covered, as it just seemed like ‘business as usual’, I didn’t pay much attention. I remember that the press didn’t pull any punches when covering Clinton’s various shenanigans though.
The press did not start covering the economic recovery until recently. There was a purpose for that politically.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And who holds a biased press accountable? It should be we the people but all of the news outlets are powerful communications corporations with a $$$ bottom line. They all keep merging and we will have a situation where the media becomes oligarchs beholden to the richest Americans like Bezos or foreigners alike.

Remeber that Fox is one of the biggest, if not the biggest. Maybe you don’t but from other threads and posts here they seem to have marketed themselves very well as a kind of home style, mom and pop organisation, which is very far from the truth, and they regularly push ideas and narratives they favour in ways that I would say are misleading, e.g having only one view which both the ‘expert’ and the reported clearly believe is just ‘true’, without any serious attempt to balance it with other views.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I can’t comment on how the last administration was covered, as it just seemed like ‘business as usual’, I didn’t pay much attention. I remember that the press didn’t pull any punches when covering Clinton’s various shenanigans though.
Yes business as usual when a liberal Democrat is in office. It was what one retired CBS news journalist called “the media’s slobbering love affair with Obama.”

The Clintons although covered in general, received protection from the MSM press explaining their side of the story in pieces which would be considered OPED pieces favorable to them and not investigative journalism.

The only reason Clinton was in the crosshairs of the media cycle in 2016 is because wikileaks did a dump on her and the Clinton foundation.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes business as usual when a liberal Democrat is in office. It was what one retired CBS news journalist called “the media’s slobbering love affair with Obama.”

The Clintons although covered in general, received protection from the MSM press explaining their side of the story in pieces which would be considered OPED pieces favorable to them and not investigative journalism.

The only reason Clinton was in the crosshairs of the media cycle in 2016 is because wikileaks did a dump on her and the Clinton foundation.

By business as usual what I meant was stable and fairly efficient, which is how it seemed to me.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
By business as usual what I meant was stable and fairly efficient, which is how it seemed to me.
Right. When you don’t investigate DoJ gun running in Mexico there will be business as usual.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Remeber that Fox is one of the biggest, if not the biggest. Maybe you don’t but from other threads and posts here they seem to have marketed themselves very well as a kind of home style, mom and pop organisation, which is very far from the truth, and they regularly push ideas and narratives they favour in ways that I would say are misleading, e.g having only one view which both the ‘expert’ and the reported clearly believe is just ‘true’, without any serious attempt to balance it with other views.
Yes Fox is in the mix. But they are the minority. Meaning they are easily contrasted to NYT, WASHPO, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC just to mention a few and add in the late night shows.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That is a case in point for what I am speaking of.

Anyone with a high school level understanding of macro economics can see right through that. Obama signed several executive orders which curtailed several industries. Trump struck them down his first week in office. Do the math.

There’s a bigger picture there though - in the 70’s in the UK some industries had to be curtailed as the long term prospects were bad for everyone. The government at the time took responsibility and stepped in, and did what needed to be done. Do you have a source for analysis of the situation under Obama, re what you mention here?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0