Does the Media Have Their Thumb on the Scale?
I pulled up nbcnews.com and was looking at story headlines and saw this headline:
"Stocks Hit Session Lows as Trump Delivers First Speech as U.S. president"
Then I scrolled down to the Business Section on the same Website and saw this:
DJIA 19804.07 +71.67(0.36%)
NASDAQ 5553.98 +13.89(0.25%)
S&P 500 2269.87 +6.18(0.27%)
So, it looks like the media, some media, are scratching for anything they can say or associate reflecting badly on the new President.
Session low. That would be today. Since when do we talk about how the market fluctuates during the day? It looks like all 3 major indicators are up, once again.
I think it's past time for the news to go back to reporting the news and letting us mere mortals decide. Thoughts?
I would like to be able to feel I could believe what I'm reading form the Main Stream Media, but I just don't see it happening. Have they always been as partisan as now? Did we not see it in years gone by, as we didn't have the media assets currently available to us?
Earlier today, I saw a story-protesters tear gassed at the DeploraBall - decrying the police use of pepper spray. Another source stated one of the attendees suffered a gash on his head from a bottle thrown by the same protesters.
I don't need the news to tell me something to make me feel good or bad, I just need to see the news.
Boy, do I agree!!!
I'm so sick of the partisan BS, I could scream. From both sides. I just want fair and honest reporting, not Entertainment Tonight.
Funny how some others on here complain about 'right wing echo chamber', etc., etc. but articles like this are roundly ignored.
You'd almost think those complaining voices are not being truthful.
Well, I didn't ignore it, now, did I.
I don't always comment, but I read almost all of the articles...
I miss Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Chet Huntley, etc. That was, real news, not this made up crap...
Does the media have their thumb on the scale?
After the BS polls and slanted coverage of the election, you still have to ask?
Yes. MSNBC referred to trump's speech as Hitlerian. No bias there. Just typical moderate and balanced right?
Yes. MSNBC referred to trump's speech as Hitlerian.
I thought it was more Trumpian. A lot of small words.
They just doubled down on their bid to be forever irrelevant.
You want partisan media? YOU GOT partisan media.
One of my children lives in DC, about a block and a half from where the protest is. Yes, THE protest. One protest. They set a limo on fire, and burned a few garbage cans, while throwing newspaper vending machines into the middle of the street.
It was the single rowdy protest in the city, but is sharing, in a split screen, with the Presidential parade.
One, little, fucking protest, and the world gets half a screen.
Media bias.
Live it.
Yeah. On CNN, there is an article comparing the size of Obama's crowd to Trump's crowd. I don't blame anyone that doesn't want to get out in 40o weather and rain, especially if dressed up. That has NOTHING to do with anything. At least, to me.
I think you miss the point. Trump claims that he is the most popular human being alive, therefore it is fair to compare those who came out for his inaugural to those who went before.
By most accounts Trumps crowd was noticeably smaller than the last few inaugurations.
The weather is worse, too. It wasn't raining for Obama...
I told you John, he just does that to get under your skin. Is it working?
And the businesses that had windows busted out? Just one little protest, Jon?
Jon,
And Windows broken out of businesses like Starbucks and Bank America that actually supported Hillary. A friend of mine personally witnessed attacks, as did his passengers.
That's not a protest, that's rioting.
I doubt President Trump will get any type of pass from the media since he has called every news outlet "fake news" unless they reported favorably about him. Who cares.....I don't know why you guys are still complaining. Your guy is now the President.
I don't agree with violent protests. I think that's silly and it does nothing for their cause but make them look like criminals that can't get their point across without violence and intimidation.
From what I saw of the protests, on tv and on you tube, I would describe it has neither small or large.
100 people were arrested, which is more than a few. They broke a number of store windows, set a couple cars on fire, and burned a bunch of trash cans.
I wish they would have stayed peaceful, but at least it seems no one was seriously hurt.
I was just talking about that with someone else. I used to work for a limo company part time when I was stationed in D.C. Did you know most limo companies are small family owned businesses? Generally owning 1-3 cars. The first company I worked for had 2, the second one eventually got a 3rd one. SO, wit a limo down and burned, 33 to 50% of their ability to do business is gone. They might be able to get the insurance company to pay for it, but then they have to order another-there aren't really any new Limo Dealer lots. SO, until a new car is built, tested and delivered, the owner, if a small business is screwed. SO who did these Left side rioters hurt? Most like a small family owned business. Way to strike a blow for the ordinary citizen.
And the restaurants and other places? Will thy be open until repairs are completed? Do the people that work there that won't be coming in to work because the business is closed get paid? Well, they probably don't need the money.
Don't come here and minimize the lawlessness of the people that claim to be on the same side of the fence as you.
I didn't minimize anything. I think 100 arrests at any protest is fairly significant. On the other hand, I didnt see any reports that the National Guard was going to be used, so the DC police must have thought they had everything under control. I seeded an article about the protests which includes two videos.
Security Will Be Massive At Trump's Inauguration
People planning to watch — or protest — Donald Trump's inauguration festivities this week should prepare to maneuver through lots of security, including thousands of law enforcement personnel, National Guard troops, fences, magnetometers and cement-laden trucks.
Johnson said some 28,000 officials will be dedicated to security for the inauguration, including Department of Homeland Security personnel from the Secret Service, the Transportation Security Administration and the Coast Guard, as well as police from various departments in Washington, D.C., and from out of town, and some 7,800 National Guard troops.
Continue Reading
This is what it takes to defend against Anarchists. It's just another thing that would have been different if Hillary had won the election.
230, that's the number of arrests, so far.
"They might be able to get the insurance company to pay for it..."
I'll bet the insurance policy contains a clause to deny coverage in the even of war, insurrection and riot.
They should force the liberals they arrested to pay for it. Under RICO.
So, PJ, if the President criticizes the mainstream media, that is their excuse and reason for publishing ultra-biased or fake news? If we're satisfied to read bias, I think I'd rather read Pamela Geller's take than The New York Times.
Unless you are a Russian propagandist, she had no interest in you.
The New York Times = The Muslim Brotherhood of news
"I don't agree with violent protests. I think that's silly and it does nothing for their cause but make them look like criminals that can't get their point across without violence and intimidation."
Silly. A violent protest is silly. Burning an auto and smashing windows is silly. People dressed in black to conceal their identity vandalizing other people's property is silly. And of course, these are just silly people, not thugs and not criminals, just silly but frustrated people. The end, justifies the means.
God save us from silly people.