The Trump Effect

CBS NEWS Admits Not Covering 26% of Terrorist Attacks Cited by Trump WH



Curiously, they've since removed the page, but fortunately an archived copy was found.
Link: http://archive.is/cvHRI#selection-993.0-993.117

 

That's pathetic.

 

Un, we can just disagree.

Does he sometimes just shoot from the hip, and say something that's dubious, ill-advised, not-in-the-best-interest? I can't argue that he doesn't, as it's self-evident. But even with that, does it mean that every remark is so similarly and unwittingly mistaken, haphazard and toward some purely unintentional end? It seems equally clear to me that they are not.

I don't know if he should be leading the war against the media, to be perfectly honest, but that they have so long and damned-well deserved for war to be brought upon them, is as certain as night follows day. And, from that perspective, if not Trump - the one man they can neither ignore nor control - then who?

 

Yes, it is, because there are only two reasons why they wouldn't have covered each:

1. It doesn't fit their idealized narrative, and they chose to simply ignore and hide it, or

2. Terrorist attacks are happening with such frequent regularity as to be beyond their ability to report on them all.

Are there any other likely and credible reasons, than these?

 

A thwarted attack just doesn't get clicks? It isn't the topic du jour? They are a business, after all.

Not passing judgment or saying it is OK. Just another reason you didnt list that is plausible.

 

If true, then how to explain the near complete fluff of the 24-hour news cycle, and round-the-clock coverage of some - but not all - similar attacks, or their attempt.

That terrorist attacks aren't newsworthy, or fail to generate sufficient interest, seems impossible to believe.

*And I well note that you're only offering another possible reason, and am not intentionally taking the piss out of you, NA.

 

I don't think these are mutually exclusive, Uni. He is impulsive and has skin so thin I'm surprised we can't see through it. He's also used the media effectively throughout, and this latest situation is just too perfect. While there is serious questioning about how great the threat may be, we now have the media cycling through their coverage of all these attacks and effectively reminding everyone terrorist attacks have and can happen.

Trump blatantly lies about something and everyone jumps all over it to demonstrate how what he says is untrue, but to do so they ultimately serve his agenda. It's a tough situation. Here's the deal: he's done plenty of lying throughout and people simply don't care, and that's the truth. He gets away with it and will continue to so so unless he commits a colossal blunder. The media is in a difficult spot. Their job includes pointing out out misinformation, but doing so will sometimes serve an agenda not their own.

I do question how much of these machinations are the work of Trump vs Bannon. My money's on the latter.

 

This is becoming a rapidly unpopular presidency, in stark terms for a new administration, and a lot of that is because of the stupid and pointless media battles. If you think that this is going somewhere positive for Trump and that Americans are pining for the executive branch and government to set the media in their place, then I think you are badly misinterpreting the mood of the country.

What in the world makes you think that the majority or even a sizeable minority really desire to see the administration wage a daily battle with the media? Most realize that he's bringing this shit upon himself.

 

Twitter is mainstream media? Can private companies not decide on who or how they deliver service?


Fascinating stuff, tenny.

He certainly implied the media doesn't cover terror attacks, I heard him say it

 

Or, they've also covered 74% of the stories that the White House says they didn't. Plus, have you seen the list? Some of them are just silly or located in countries with strong repression of journalist, making it difficult to cover.

The list by the White House was ridiculous and rightly getting panned roundly.

 

So the expectation is that media cover every event of particular categories of the president's choice. We are rapidly entering into a dystopian world of less freedom, to the applause of many who think this is the way to more freedom.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-false-terror-claims/?utm_term=.030fdcb155bd disgusting. The whole platform is based on lies.

 

Yep, there's a very specific bent to the list and who's not included on this list is as revealing as who is. All acts on the list are by Muslims, but no mentions of terrorist actions against Muslims or right wing extremists, either.

 

if twitter isn't mainstream media I don't know what mainstream media is. I bet more people get their news on twitter than fox, cnn, and msnbc combined.

 

Twitter is not a news media. Twitter doesn't control what I put out on my account other than if I put something out against their TOS.

If people get their news from random twitter handles spouting god knows what, then that is on them.

 

Oh? who is twitters editor? Name a reporter that works for twitter. Name a big expose that twitter did.

You apparently don't know what mainstream media is. Unless trump works for twitter, and is speaking about himself.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/...rror-attacks-underreported-by-media.html?_r=1

 

This fantasy is untenable. Morons lead the nation.

 

well yeah, but it's still a huge news source.

 

what? twitter breaks more breaking news that any other news source combined. next you will tell me uber isn't a taxi service because uber drivers aren't employees of uber.