The faulty WaPo headline you cited was distorted in other ways as well. One reading it might well assume that Trump’s audience at that Black church was made up of actual members of that church, and that those attendees were, well, Black. The vast majority of the audience was neither. WaPo would have done well not to aid the campaign in conveying that false impression.
What I wish the Jonathan Karls of the corporate media would do is respond to bullshitters like Tim Scott with a simple "Senator, if all you are going to do is willfully lie to me, this interview is over. Thank you for your time." and end the interview. All the attempted follow up in the world is not going to make the slightest difference if the media lets them lie without taking away the platform they so lust for - a legit, not Fox, non right wing outlet.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be a journalist. I eventually became one and later went on to teach journalism. Today’s journalists are an embarrassment to the profession.
Ben...apologies for riding on your comment. i can't make the comment site work for me.
There is another hugely important thing they all lie about: Social Security does not add to the federal deficit. but it does need to raise the payroll tax one tenth of one percent per year to pay for longer life expectancies. that is about a dollar per week per year. this can be verified. Roosevelt designed SS to be worker-paid "so no damn politician can take it away from them."
"making the rich pay" is suicide. even waldman ignores this. for more look up social security on angrybear blog. coberly..
You're good, Coberly. The gop's 2025 Program wants to cut the payroll tax.. there goes Social Security. It's appalling how majority of the mag people that support Trump are going to be hurt the most. Is it okay to sit here.
For years Republicans have wanted to privatize SS by forcing people to put it into private investment accounts. Because polls showed the public hated the idea, Frank Luntz helped Dubya’s marketing effort by coming up with the terms “choice” and “privatization”. They use the idea of average stock market returns, not making it clear that half of the people will make less, some much less. If I remember correctly that libertarian idea was tried in Chile (under the guidance of Milton Friedman acolytes from U of Chicago). The government had to step in to make up the difference for people who lost money.
you are right about chile. i think the government "make up" turned out to be less than adequate. i will try to find something to post on angrybearblog in case anyone looks. SS provides moderate returns, but they are absolutely guaranteed against inflation and market losses. they are also insured by the workers themselves in case they never make enough money to save enough to pay for a minimum retirement even with the normal SS "interest." also insure against disability and death of the family wage earner. meanwhile the congress ignores the only solution to the "actuarial deficit" {not a debt}mwhile lying about SS causing the Federal deficit [a real debt]. and the Left thinks the answer is to "make the rich pay," which the rich won't do, and if we could "make them" they would find ways to destroy SS entirely {"we have the will but not the wallet" as Bush Sr said about welfare and other programs that benefit the poor.
the reason SS was "the third rail" is that workers could say "we paid for it ourselves." that is still true, but some people have forgotten it.
"is it okay..." i don't understand question. tentative answer: of course. i hope to figure out eventually how to a comment in my own space. currently getting "something went wrong" message.
I think it would help if people would also point out that not only that the crime spike happened under Trump it was probably the result of people not working during covid and also his fanning anger, hatred and conspiracy theories about covid.
Our wealthy media class make a show of bemoaning the devaluation of truth in our society, and then when someone lies in their faces, they don’t think the truth is important enough to find out what the liar thinks about the next item on their question list. “Can’t derail this interview by pointing out the lie or else he won’t have time to lie about anything else” does not give people the impression that the truth is very important!
And you point out something I’ve been saying a long time: This would make compelling TV. People would click on it. So the reason our wealthy media stars don’t do it is something else.
I will pay for media that places the truth first, and "balance" second. And I will pay for honest analysis that's trying to figure something out, even if I sometimes disagree with the conclusions.
The US political media has shamelessly abandoned any pretext of trying to learn and communicate the truth. It's an entertainment product that wants to attract as many viewers as possible, without confronting those viewers' false beliefs. After all, confronting viewers' false beliefs would cut their potential market in half.
Also, figuring out the truth is hard. You have to do research, understand things, and make judgement calls. You might get it wrong. People might yell at you. It's so much easier to just take quotes from both sides and "report the controversy." And it's more profitable, and it keeps your billionaire owners happy.
As someone who does pay for various kinds of news, I'm not interested in what that US political press wants to sell, with a few honorable exceptions.
I trace the blatant lying to the media and public from the beginning on the Trump administration when Kellyanne Conway coined the term "alternate facts" and Sean Spicer said that the good economic reports were phony on the last days of the Obama administration. He literally laughed on the first day of the Trump administration saying the good economic reports were no longer phony. When the press laughed along with these liars, it's hard for them now to hold these folks accountable. But it is not impossible. George Stephanopoulos has done a good job lately. However there needs to be a critical mass of journalists doing this. Otherwise the liars will just not book on the one or two programs that will call them out.
The faulty WaPo headline you cited was distorted in other ways as well. One reading it might well assume that Trump’s audience at that Black church was made up of actual members of that church, and that those attendees were, well, Black. The vast majority of the audience was neither. WaPo would have done well not to aid the campaign in conveying that false impression.
What I wish the Jonathan Karls of the corporate media would do is respond to bullshitters like Tim Scott with a simple "Senator, if all you are going to do is willfully lie to me, this interview is over. Thank you for your time." and end the interview. All the attempted follow up in the world is not going to make the slightest difference if the media lets them lie without taking away the platform they so lust for - a legit, not Fox, non right wing outlet.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be a journalist. I eventually became one and later went on to teach journalism. Today’s journalists are an embarrassment to the profession.
So true carol. I have a degree in government journalism and what the Press is doing is just absurd and disgraceful
Where did you get a degree in government journalism? That sounds like a field I would have liked to pursue.
Outstanding article. I agree
Ben...apologies for riding on your comment. i can't make the comment site work for me.
There is another hugely important thing they all lie about: Social Security does not add to the federal deficit. but it does need to raise the payroll tax one tenth of one percent per year to pay for longer life expectancies. that is about a dollar per week per year. this can be verified. Roosevelt designed SS to be worker-paid "so no damn politician can take it away from them."
"making the rich pay" is suicide. even waldman ignores this. for more look up social security on angrybear blog. coberly..
You're good, Coberly. The gop's 2025 Program wants to cut the payroll tax.. there goes Social Security. It's appalling how majority of the mag people that support Trump are going to be hurt the most. Is it okay to sit here.
For years Republicans have wanted to privatize SS by forcing people to put it into private investment accounts. Because polls showed the public hated the idea, Frank Luntz helped Dubya’s marketing effort by coming up with the terms “choice” and “privatization”. They use the idea of average stock market returns, not making it clear that half of the people will make less, some much less. If I remember correctly that libertarian idea was tried in Chile (under the guidance of Milton Friedman acolytes from U of Chicago). The government had to step in to make up the difference for people who lost money.
Theodora
you are right about chile. i think the government "make up" turned out to be less than adequate. i will try to find something to post on angrybearblog in case anyone looks. SS provides moderate returns, but they are absolutely guaranteed against inflation and market losses. they are also insured by the workers themselves in case they never make enough money to save enough to pay for a minimum retirement even with the normal SS "interest." also insure against disability and death of the family wage earner. meanwhile the congress ignores the only solution to the "actuarial deficit" {not a debt}mwhile lying about SS causing the Federal deficit [a real debt]. and the Left thinks the answer is to "make the rich pay," which the rich won't do, and if we could "make them" they would find ways to destroy SS entirely {"we have the will but not the wallet" as Bush Sr said about welfare and other programs that benefit the poor.
the reason SS was "the third rail" is that workers could say "we paid for it ourselves." that is still true, but some people have forgotten it.
Ben. thanks.
"is it okay..." i don't understand question. tentative answer: of course. i hope to figure out eventually how to a comment in my own space. currently getting "something went wrong" message.
Ben. thanks.
"is it okay..." i don't understand question. tentative answer: of course. i hope to figure out eventually how to a comment in my own space.
Ben. thanks.
"is it okay..." i don't understand question. tentative answer: of course. i hope to figure out eventually how to a comment in my own space.
I think it would help if people would also point out that not only that the crime spike happened under Trump it was probably the result of people not working during covid and also his fanning anger, hatred and conspiracy theories about covid.
Our wealthy media class make a show of bemoaning the devaluation of truth in our society, and then when someone lies in their faces, they don’t think the truth is important enough to find out what the liar thinks about the next item on their question list. “Can’t derail this interview by pointing out the lie or else he won’t have time to lie about anything else” does not give people the impression that the truth is very important!
And you point out something I’ve been saying a long time: This would make compelling TV. People would click on it. So the reason our wealthy media stars don’t do it is something else.
I will pay for media that places the truth first, and "balance" second. And I will pay for honest analysis that's trying to figure something out, even if I sometimes disagree with the conclusions.
The US political media has shamelessly abandoned any pretext of trying to learn and communicate the truth. It's an entertainment product that wants to attract as many viewers as possible, without confronting those viewers' false beliefs. After all, confronting viewers' false beliefs would cut their potential market in half.
Also, figuring out the truth is hard. You have to do research, understand things, and make judgement calls. You might get it wrong. People might yell at you. It's so much easier to just take quotes from both sides and "report the controversy." And it's more profitable, and it keeps your billionaire owners happy.
As someone who does pay for various kinds of news, I'm not interested in what that US political press wants to sell, with a few honorable exceptions.
I trace the blatant lying to the media and public from the beginning on the Trump administration when Kellyanne Conway coined the term "alternate facts" and Sean Spicer said that the good economic reports were phony on the last days of the Obama administration. He literally laughed on the first day of the Trump administration saying the good economic reports were no longer phony. When the press laughed along with these liars, it's hard for them now to hold these folks accountable. But it is not impossible. George Stephanopoulos has done a good job lately. However there needs to be a critical mass of journalists doing this. Otherwise the liars will just not book on the one or two programs that will call them out.
Keep on persisting with the facts! Thank you!