[RD] GOP war on the First Amendment

[Gori the Grey]

When Trump was lying about how big his electoral victory was (why? why does he even lie about such things???), .

Trump's political pose is that he speaks and acts on behalf of "America," against a variety of forces that are acting against that America (courts, the press, i.e. any thing that dares act as a check on him). Not to have gotten a majority of votes bigly undercuts this pose, as even he realizes, as perhaps especially he realizes.

On this note, another way of phrasing a complaint against the electoral college is that it can, as here, give us a would-be populist president who didn't win the popular vote--with all the attendant turmoil we've seen.

 

[Cutlass]

Kicking agencies out of press conferences does not violate freedom of the press and the first amendment. They can write whatever they want about Trump. They always do, in fact; evidence and solid sources be damned. But there are always concerns about transparency. Honest question, what does the law say? Is this just a breach of custom, or does it violate a law of some sort regarding transparency?

For what it's worth, I'm quite happy with how he treats these monsters during his press conferences. Sneering at them, blowing off their questions, insulting the reporters, high-handed scorn, I've never seen anything like it. It's just awesome. I could not be happier that things like this are "escalating tensions in the already fraught relationship between the Trump administration and the press," as your article puts it. I wouldn't piss on CNN and the NY Times if they were on fire. I'm so glad they're going down in flames. Thanks again, internet.

Thing being that in a free country the government works for us. And that is only true so long as us knows what the government is doing. Trump, by kicking out the honest journalists, and only talking to those who will lie for him, is acting to prevent the public from knowing what the government is doing. And the only reason to do that is so that the government doesn't have to work for us.

 

[Glassfan]

I read that Trump has started banning some major media outlets (BBC, CNN etc.) from press briefings as well. There are some ominous winds blowing in the Western hemisphere at the moment.

Not to defend this President (whom I abhor), but it does seem rather obvious that these media have become extremely hostile to the current administration. Not even the appearance of objectivity. They are partisan and are losing the respect of the informed public.

It's basically moderates' dream. Now you'll have perfectly peaceful protests, or none at all. Awesome!

When a white cop kills a Black man, you condemn all cops. When one offers the "one-bad-apple argument", you ridicule. But when a protest becomes a mob, you suddenly want to differentiate between the peaceful protesters and a few-bad-apples. Unreasonable.

 

[El_Machinae]

It's a tough call. They sell clicks. And a lot of news networks are terrible at selling the news. But can you really call them biased when the person is objectively terrible? At what point does his past behaviour justify poor current treatment?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Not to defend this President (whom I abhor), but it does seem rather obvious that these media have become extremely hostile to the current administration. Not even the appearance of objectivity. They are partisan and are losing the respect of the informed public.

Hostile? Absolutely, as long as you say that calling a bald faced lie a lie is hostility. The source of that problem is Trump, not the media organizations...which by the way are setting record numbers with the informed public, so apparently there is no great loss of respect. Other than with the Faux News crowd, but they certainly can't be described as "the informed public." After all, they believe idiotic false claims like "the New York Times is losing the respect of the informed public" that Dingbat Donny Tweets out. Then they parrot them.

 

[Glassfan]

There is an editorial section where a media outlet may give opinions and endorsements. But when the media uses it's news section to attack candidates, then that's partisan and unbalanced. In the last few months before the election, for instance, CNN.com had daily anti-Trump headlines and lead video. The anti-Hilary news required scrolling to the bottom.

There is no question here that Donald Trump is a liar, a cheat and a bigot. That doesn't make the media clean - rather, it has been partisan and hostile to one candidate. Hilary was also a liar, a cheat and a thief but was giving far less hostility by the liberal press.

Gallup sez:

"WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year."

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I think the "trust in the mass media" figure is misleading. Faux News is included in "the mass media" and a lot of people would say "distrust" just because of that, for example. That doesn't say anything about the quality of actual journalism.

 

[Glassfan]

Then I suppose "trust in Trump" is equally misleading, since it comes from the media we don't trust.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Then I suppose "trust in Trump" is equally misleading, since it comes from the media we don't trust.

Poll results don't come from the media, they come from polling agencies. Some of those are reliable, and some aren't. Some media chooses to report on the reliable ones, and some choose to report on the unreliable ones. But the reliable ones all agree that Trump isn't trusted by a majority of people.

 

[plarq]

On CFC OT, this should be called the BvBPL law.

It's basically moderates' dream. Now you'll have perfectly peaceful protests, or none at all. Awesome!

Ban OP for violation in replies? Good idea! Now nobody will start crazy stupid titles.

Edit: FWIW, polls are highly unreliable, because inherently reporting bias here, a significant portion of population refuse to be polled while they do have opinions and do express them when convenient.

News agencies are also run by agendas, but at least they have public responsibility and shareholder's burden there to keep a check on them.

 

[El_Machinae]

But when the media uses it's news section to attack candidates, then that's partisan and unbalanced. In the last few months before the election, for instance, CNN.com had daily anti-Trump headlines and lead video. The anti-Hilary news required scrolling to the bottom.

There is no question here that Donald Trump is a liar, a cheat and a bigot. That doesn't make the media clean - rather, it has been partisan and hostile to one candidate. Hilary was also a liar, a cheat and a thief but was giving far less hostility by the liberal press.

I'm not denying that there was bias. But merely saying that some of that bias is due to previous behavior. There was literally less bad news about Hillary available. Wikileaks presented a strong moral conundrum for legitimate news sources, since it's a single and unverified source of information. And while various Rightwing news sources had no problem printing those stories, they're hard stories to write and still be an honest journalist. I mean, the free market doesn't care. We want clickbait and Headon to Apply Directly to Forehead. But there were literally fewer stories.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm not denying that there was bias. But merely saying that some of that bias is due to previous behavior. There was literally less bad news about Hillary available. Wikileaks presented a strong moral conundrum for legitimate news sources, since it's a single and unverified source of information. And while various Rightwing news sources had no problem printing those stories, they're hard stories to write and still be an honest journalist. I mean, the free market doesn't care. We want clickbait and Headon to Apply Directly to Forehead. But there were literally fewer stories.

Unfortunately the media commitment to "balanced coverage" ended up producing:

Trump whopping lie story
Clinton and the e-mail non story
Trump next whopping lie story
Clinton and the e-mail still not really a story
Trump next whopping lie story
Clinton and it still isn't really a story but remember the e-mails

And that had consequences. Eventually some outlets, most notably CNN, realized the error, but it was too late.

 

[Zkribbler]

Kicking agencies out of press conferences does not violate freedom of the press and the first amendment. They can write whatever they want about Trump. They always do, in fact; evidence and solid sources be damned. But there are always concerns about transparency. Honest question, what does the law say? Is this just a breach of custom, or does it violate a law of some sort regarding transparency?

For what it's worth, I'm quite happy with how he treats these monsters during his press conferences. Sneering at them, blowing off their questions, insulting the reporters, high-handed scorn, I've never seen anything like it. It's just awesome. I could not be happier that things like this are "escalating tensions in the already fraught relationship between the Trump administration and the press," as your article puts it. I wouldn't piss on CNN and the NY Times if they were on fire. I'm so glad they're going down in flames. Thanks again, internet.

Before the blow up, CNN found out it had to be "one the list" in order to attend. CNN put its name on the list, The White House removed it. Purporsely keeping the press away from a story is a form of censorship.

Remember when Obama tried to kick Fox News out of briefings, and the mainstream media when to bat for Fox? How is Fox reporting this story?.

 

[Zkribbler]

Sean Spicer is cracking down on leaks. He called in all his aides, made them hand over both their government and private cell phones, and then he checked them for calls to reporters. The meeting ended with him telling his staff not to tell the press about the meeting.

Word of the meeting was immediately leaked to Politico.

Welcome to Washington, Mr. Spince. This is a city which floats on a sea of leaks.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

About the time he said "hand over your private cell phone" I'd have been looking for a new job...and since I was looking for a new job anyway I'd have gone out with a bang.

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, maybe. But access to your private cellphone is a reasonable condition of being so important in the White House. I mean, it's a condition you'd sign to ahead of time, sure. But it's a reasonable condition.

A variety of people Trump's team posted into the White House didn't survive the FBI and CIA security screen process. You waive some privacy by accepting the position.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, maybe. But access to your private cellphone is a reasonable condition of being so important in the White House. I mean, it's a condition you'd sign to ahead of time, sure. But it's a reasonable condition.

A variety of people Trump's team posted into the White House didn't survive the FBI and CIA security screen process. You waive some privacy by accepting the position.

Agreed. If I had signed on for it I'd put up with it. No doubt there is some sort of requirement regarding official security requirements. However, I suspect that the access requirement did not extend to "random checks for calls to reporters by Sean Spicer."

 

[Old Hippy]

what happens at the next Trump rally if violence breaks out is he responsible for organising a riot
does he lose his house .....
Political Correctness gone mad.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

what happens at the next Trump rally if violence breaks out is he responsible for organising a riot
does he lose his house .....
Political Correctness gone mad.

Need to get him out to Arizona, definitely.

 

[onejayhawk]

Well, maybe. But access to your private cellphone is a reasonable condition of being so important in the White House. I mean, it's a condition you'd sign to ahead of time, sure. But it's a reasonable condition.

A variety of people Trump's team posted into the White House didn't survive the FBI and CIA security screen process. You waive some privacy by accepting the position.

More than some privacy. Why did Hillary Clinton set up the server if not to avoid questions?

what happens at the next Trump rally if violence breaks out is he responsible for organising a riot. does he lose his house .....Political Correctness gone mad.

If wikileaks is to be believed, the riots at Trump events were organized by DNC. Political correctness indeed.

J