Jump to content

Media behaving badly

Politics   (75,299 Views 833 Comments)
18,335 Visitors; 2,281 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

You are reading page 17 of Media behaving badly. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

14 hours ago, herring_RN said:

2016 campaign pictures:

oocandidatebencarson1_zpsk7ir56ha.jpg  

Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson rides the Sky Glider with a reporter while touring the Iowa State Fair. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

 

With Kamala Harris, I don’t have a problem with the venue or the fact reporters were there to cover her.  As Tweety mentioned and you have shown, there have always been candidates doing these types of these with reporters following them around.  And, these are humans and I’m sure there have always been journalists and candidates who have developed some kind of bond or friendly rapport.  

I feel that at one time, journalists took better care to be objective and to not show bias or the appearance of bias.  What struck me was that these three reporters from the major networks don’t seem to care if they appear objective or not.  They are there to cover a story, but via Twitter made themselves part of the story.  Kinda goes back to what I said of journalism not adhering to any kind of professional standard.

Imagine a reporter covering Trump while he golfed video’d himself giving Trump golf tips, high fiving him after a great shot, and then Tweeting out the video.  A week later the same reporter publishes a investigative article that concludes there is no collusion between Trump and the Russians.  I can only imagine what would be said by some here, especially by our former journalist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Tweety said:

From the Washington Post.  There was reason to be skeptical.  My best friend even said he had doubts from the start and finds it interesting how it's playing out.  I didn't read between the lines that critically myself as I tend to skim some stories. Cory Booker apparently didn't see it coming either.  

So I wonder is it the press's job to report a story and say "but I'm skeptical" or just report the story, or as some say just sit on it and wait.

Also, as noted on the video I mentioned above one of the other panelists said a lot of the judgement was coming from outside the press, especially on social media.  Were people just too hungry for another example of MAGA hate and homophobia that they jumped on the story without thinking?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/opinions/2019/02/17/i-doubted-jussie-smollett-it-breaks-my-heart-that-i-might-be-right/?nid=menu_nav_accessibilityforscreenreader&outputType=accessibility&utm_term=.bb09da58cb4b   

 

I don’t fault the media much here.  The politicians are the ones shooting their mouths off before they know anything.

I did notice they haven’t said much about a black man shooting up his wirkplace with a illegal gun in a state with some of the toughest gun laws on the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SC_RNDude said:

I don’t fault the media much here.  The politicians are the ones shooting their mouths off before they know anything.

I did notice they haven’t said much about a black man shooting up his wirkplace with a illegal gun in a state with some of the toughest gun laws on the books.

A law that is not enforced does no good. I think enforcing federal gun laws could save some lives.

Quote

 

Editorial: After Aurora, Illinois has to tighten gun law enforcement

According to authorities, the man who fatally shot five employees of Henry Pratt Co. and wounded several officers Friday was a convicted felon. Gary Martin served time in prison in Mississippi in the 1990s for aggravated assault. Yet about a decade later, he was issued an Illinois firearm owner’s identification card and purchased a Smith & Wesson .40-caliber handgun.

Not everyone is allowed to have a FOID. A felony conviction is a disqualifier. Martin wasn’t flagged until after his purchase, when he sought a concealed carry license. It appears that during the background check process, which included fingerprinting, his criminal record popped up. What happened next? Frustratingly, not enough. Martin’s FOID was revoked, but he kept his firearm — later using it to cause a bloodbath in Aurora.

There are gun laws on the books designed to keep weapons away from dangerous people. Then there is enforcement. In this instance, there was a deadly lapse. Martin should never have received a FOID. Once that error was discovered, Illinois State Police apparently would have notified Martin by letter that he was not legally eligible to own a gun. Obviously, he either never got notification or ignored it. And no one took his gun away...

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-aurora-shooting-illinois-gun-laws-foid-control-rights-20190217-story.html 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SC_RNDude said:

With Kamala Harris, I don’t have a problem with the venue or the fact reporters were there to cover her.  As Tweety mentioned and you have shown, there have always been candidates doing these types of these with reporters following them around.  And, these are humans and I’m sure there have always been journalists and candidates who have developed some kind of bond or friendly rapport.  

I feel that at one time, journalists took better care to be objective and to not show bias or the appearance of bias.  What struck me was that these three reporters from the major networks don’t seem to care if they appear objective or not.  They are there to cover a story, but via Twitter made themselves part of the story.  Kinda goes back to what I said of journalism not adhering to any kind of professional standard.

Imagine a reporter covering Trump while he golfed video’d himself giving Trump golf tips, high fiving him after a great shot, and then Tweeting out the video.  A week later the same reporter publishes a investigative article that concludes there is no collusion between Trump and the Russians.  I can only imagine what would be said by some here, especially by our former journalist.

I still don't get it.  How is giving someone props for looking good on a shopping spree not being objective?  

About the reporter that Tweets that Trump was on his game and they had a good time, I would certainly expect that a good reporter when reporting a news story later would stick to the facts.  Now if this was the only reporter that had these facts and was breaking the story, then yes I would probably go hmmmm.... but surely other reporters would jump on it and try to get to the facts.    But don't you think it would be headline news if the investigation closes showing no collusion and this reporter wouldn't be the only one?  

I understand that stranger things have happened in the world of politics and reporting and perhaps it might be best to be stoic on the offhand chance it bites you later, but most people don't operate like that.  Sometimes, it's just best to be yourself no matter how much people are going to spin it and these days each side is going to spin the other side to look bad.

Edited by Tweety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SC_RNDude said:

I don’t fault the media much here.  The politicians are the ones shooting their mouths off before they know anything.

I did notice they haven’t said much about a black man shooting up his wirkplace with a illegal gun in a state with some of the toughest gun laws on the books.

Nice deflection.

Local and state politicians did comment.  While it was national news it does seem to be that when it involves children or large amounts of people like in the theater do national politicians respond.  Obama often commented on shootings but certainly not every mass shooting because he would have been commented every day.  How many has Trump commented on?

I think it's more of a "well another workplace shooting..thoughts and prayers.....yawn" response...next story. 

Had he been an illegal immigrant and not a homegrown killer, what do you think the response would have been?

Edited by Tweety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SC_RNDude said:

 I can only imagine what would be said by some here, especially by our former journalist.

Was that necessary?  Why be the instigator?  Those of us on the sidelines are really tired of you two and you're back and forth, and that's just what we see for things are deleted by admins.  😂.  Take the high road for a change.  You can only change yourself.

Seriously.  

Edited by Tweety

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tweety said:

Nice deflection.

Local and state politicians did comment.  While it was national news it does seem to be that when it involves children or large amounts of people like in the theater do national politicians respond.  Obama often commented on shootings but certainly not every mass shooting because he would have been commented every day.  How many has Trump commented on?

I think it's more of a "well another workplace shooting..thoughts and prayers.....yawn" response...next story. 

Had he been an illegal immigrant and not a homegrown killer, what do you think the response would have been?

Is this a joke?

Is this the propaganda the NRA is selling?

This comment is completely subpar, and of course, simply NOT true.

I have read numerous accounts in the media of this latest shooting.

You do know WHO hasn't discussed it?

Yep, you all guessed correctly!

DJT!

The buffoon continues to be fixated on his vanity crisis, while the real crisis in this country goes unaddressed: Gun violence.

But of course, the issue of gun violence doesn't stir up the rabid base that erroneously believes that liberals want to take their guns.

The poster reflects behavior akin to the man-child he supports.

His ridiculous post about Senator Harris was met with yawns and further put into context by the WaPo.

So, now, an even more inflammatory post, similar to a temper tantrum.

Hey, it is the same behavior as DJT.

Shameful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow, my response to dude, ended up on Tweety's post.

I apologize, Tweety.

My response wasn't immediately directed at you.

It was meant to register my utter disgust at dude's post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tweety said:

From the Washington Post.  There was reason to be skeptical.  My best friend even said he had doubts from the start and finds it interesting how it's playing out.  I didn't read between the lines that critically myself as I tend to skim some stories. Cory Booker apparently didn't see it coming either.  

So I wonder is it the press's job to report a story and say "but I'm skeptical" or just report the story, or as some say just sit on it and wait.

Also, as noted on the video I mentioned above one of the other panelists said a lot of the judgement was coming from outside the press, especially on social media.  Were people just too hungry for another example of MAGA hate and homophobia that they jumped on the story without thinking?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/opinions/2019/02/17/i-doubted-jussie-smollett-it-breaks-my-heart-that-i-might-be-right/?nid=menu_nav_accessibilityforscreenreader&outputType=accessibility&utm_term=.bb09da58cb4b   

 

I had doubts about it.

And my doubts were based on the news reports that read and heard.

The part about the unknown liquid caught my attention.

Something about it wasn't right, and that is why I never commented on the alleged attack.

Reporters should cover an alleged attack.

And also cover the follow-up events.

That is mass media 101.

Basic news story.

Jane Doe says she attacked by five assailants last night, while walking dog.

Ms. Doe, 43, says the dogs just wanted to pee.

"Sally Mae just squatted to piss, when I was attacked from behind."

Ms. For treated at a local hospital for superficial cuts to her forehead.

There were no other witnesses to the attack.

UK police are investigating CCTV tapes from local businesses in the area.

############

And as details emerge, or Ms. Doe dies from misdiagnosed injuries, you follow up.

A reporter writing they are skeptical turns the piece from straight reporting, into an opinion piece.

And that isn't the role of a beat reporter.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish someone in Trump's five-ring circus would tell him two things.

First, in the US, we celebrate this thing called the First Amendment. It covers free speech in this country.

It is what allows SNL, a comedy show, to criticize him.

It also allows Trump, to publicly disparage a Gold Star family.

I am being to think that in the buffoon's small mind, he thinks that second, comes before first.

Secondly, one of the circus players, maybe Ivanka, needs to tell Trump that living in a country such as the US, with a robust First Amendment, requires a thick skin.

Perhaps the buffoon would be more comfortable, in Russia?

Trump is a complete moron.

Yes, by all means, investigate SNL.

That only plays to the rabid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tweety said:

Was that necessary?  Why be the instigator?  Those of us on the sidelines are really tired of you two and you're back and forth, and that's just what we see for things are deleted by admins.  😂.  Take the high road for a change.  You can only change yourself.

Seriously.  

It was an accurate statement imo to make a point.  However, I get what you’re saying and I’ll refrain in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×