The 4th Estate Thread Has Surrendered

[hepcat]

Before the days of professional-grade, aspirationally objective journalism, newspapers were highly slanted and highly partisan in every way. Journalism was Fake News before it was real news. At least in spirit, Drudge and Breitbart came long before the New York Times and the BBC.

This.

The golden age of objective and hard hitting journalism was relatively short lived. And the entire time conservatives were screaming about liberal media bias, which led to scared outlets trying to walk the line like CNN. The one good thing from this Trump fiasco is that it seems like some outlets have doubled down on trying to get back to that hard hitting, objective journalism.

Good for them but I suspect it is more politics than any love of a free and hard hitting press. When the power shifts the other direction they will return to being lapdogs so quick your head will spin.

That's bunk. The press called out Obama on numerous occasions. Drone killings, the NSA spying, etc. The only difference now is that we have a thin skinned man child in the office who doesn't have the integrity or backbone to accept criticism of any kind.

[Isgrimnur]

NY Times

In a sign of discomfort with the White House stance, Fox’s television news competitors refused to go along with a Treasury Department effort on Thursday to exclude Fox from a round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg that was to be conducted with a “pool” camera crew shared by all the networks. That followed a pointed question at a White House briefing this week by Jake Tapper, an ABC News correspondent, about the administration’s treatment of “one of our sister organizations.”

That was 2009.

[Kraken]

Saturday Night Live and Rachel Maddow are both enjoying a huge "Trump bump" in their ratings. Maddow's show in particular was kind of sleepy during the Obama administration, but she's found her footing again. Her secret?

Maddow said she believes her approach to Trump’s White House has been an important factor. “We basically cover them as if they are a silent movie,” she said. “I stopped covering the Twitter feed and we started covering only what they do rather than what they say.”

...

Maddow told The Wrap that leaving behind Trump’s tweets and other verbiage was clarifying: “I really feel like it was helpful to me, in terms of trying to come up with what to talk about every day, and serving up information for our audience that is substantive and not manipulated by people at the White House,” Maddow said. “It was helpful for us to just stop paying attention to what they were saying.”

[Holman]

I've become a huge Maddow fan this year. She's sometimes a little too chipper in her delivery, but this is probably to offset the necessarily procedural details of her reporting.

She's doing actual journalism on TV, and that's a rare thing.

[malchior]

In which Greg Sargent talks about how crazy Trump is. but then drops this whopper of a paragraph:

It should be stated that the White House may rack up wins that make these early contretemps look less consequential in retrospect. Republicans may push through a repeal-and-replace bill; the travel ban may survive the courts; Neil Gorsuch may get confirmed to the Supreme Court; Trump and Republicans may get a budget through, including deep tax cuts for the rich; and so forth. Those could easily end up resetting the narrative.

This is a problem. I get he is simply observing what happens in the media but they shouldn't be cheerleaders for the "winning side". In effect, the narrative shouldn't become positive if they start pushing through their nihilist agenda. It should be cause for even more concern. I have deep, deep disdain for this type of thinking. How can you spill this much "ink" about deep rot and then throw out the old ends justifies the means philosophy that papers over it? The use of power in mendacious ways shouldn't be accepted no matter the outcome. Ever.

[El Guapo]

In which Greg Sargent talks about how crazy Trump is. but then drops this whopper of a paragraph:

It should be stated that the White House may rack up wins that make these early contretemps look less consequential in retrospect. Republicans may push through a repeal-and-replace bill; the travel ban may survive the courts; Neil Gorsuch may get confirmed to the Supreme Court; Trump and Republicans may get a budget through, including deep tax cuts for the rich; and so forth. Those could easily end up resetting the narrative.

This is a problem. I get he is simply observing what happens in the media but they shouldn't be cheerleaders for the "winning side". In effect, the narrative shouldn't become positive if they start pushing through their nihilist agenda. It should be cause for even more concern. I have deep, deep disdain for this type of thinking. How can you spill this much "ink" about deep rot and then throw out the old ends justifies the means philosophy that papers over it? The use of power in mendacious ways shouldn't be accepted no matter the outcome. Ever.

I'm honestly at a loss about how you see that paragraph as "cheerleading for the winning side." The point is just that Trump is widely perceived as being essentially on the ropes, under the gun, etc. Point is that it's still early and he hasn't actually suffered much in the way of enduring losses. He could (probably will) rack up a number of policy changes this year, and if he does, views of Trump will probably change as a result.

[malchior]

Here is another try at the idea. His argument seems to be that policy wins even if pushed through with malice and bad faith will change the narrative. And make the first two months look like growing pains versus norms being trashed.

That sounds right and really speaks to the practices of a McConnell who acts shitty because he knows that we only talk about the "winning side" in general. Something that seekers of truth should shrink away from. Not just shrug at. That will only happen if they ignore properly contextualuzing all the rot underneath the potential victories.

Yeah history is written by the victors but it doesn't have to be anymore. Almost everything is right there to see now. I cant help but think future historians (if there are any) are going to marvel at the lack of capacity to explain what is happening versus painting everything in bullshit 'narratives' or tropes.

[El Guapo]

I mean, I get (and am frustrated by) media coverage that focuses on the procedure / political horse-race over the substance of what is happening. Most disgusting case was the coverage of Trump's SOTU address that talked about how "presidential" he was, and ignored the horrible things that he was saying.

That said, that doesn't mean that one shouldn't analyze media narratives, as that's going to shape Trump's presidency and his popularity. I see what Sargent is writing here as more of the latter than the former. It's not that different from what David Frum has been beating the drums about - Trump's opponents shouldn't blithely assume that Trump will crater as President and not get (terrible) shit done just because his first two months have been a shit show.

[malchior]

I can see what you are saying. He is being a realist as a warning. Fair but he is part of that machine. That sure as shit didn't sound too introspective. More like acceptance of a truth which is galling especially since it is approaching the root cause of the media's problem IMO. And moreso a big part of why we are in this shit show of a mess.

[malchior]

Jeffrey Lord helpfully points out that Obama lied too. What the heck is CNN thinking when they green light garbage like this?

[El Guapo]

Jeffrey Lord helpfully points out that Obama lied too. What the heck is CNN thinking when they green light garbage like this?

Oh, CNN's a hot mess, and they were a disaster during the campaign in particular, giving platforms to Lord, Corey Lewandowski (while he was subject to an NDA with the Trump campaign!!!), etc. They've been better since Trump's inauguration - they've broken a number of important stories.

But yes, they certainly have issues.

[malchior]

Jeffrey Lord helpfully points out that Obama lied too. What the heck is CNN thinking when they green light garbage like this?

Oh, CNN's a hot mess, and they were a disaster during the campaign in particular, giving platforms to Lord, Corey Lewandowski (while he was subject to an NDA with the Trump campaign!!!), etc. They've been better since Trump's inauguration - they've broken a number of important stories.

But yes, they certainly have issues.

I'm always amazed when anyone calls it the Clinton News Network. Every time I'm thinking to myself they hired Trump's disgraced campaign manager, they' have Jeffrey Lord on-the-air every day spewing bullshit, and that spectacle of Van Jones fawning over the SOTU speech. Hot mess is right.

[Moliere]

American democracy: Not so decadent after all

4. The media.

Trump is right. It is the opposition party. Indeed, furiously so, often indulging in appalling overkill. It’s sometimes embarrassing to read the front pages of the major newspapers, festooned as they are with anti-Trump editorializing masquerading as news.

Nonetheless, if you take the view from 30,000 feet, better this than a press acquiescing on bended knee, where it spent most of the Obama years in a slavish Pravda-like thrall. Every democracy needs an opposition press. We damn well have one now.

Taken together — and suspending judgment on which side is right on any particular issue — it is deeply encouraging that the sinews of institutional resistance to a potentially threatening executive remain quite resilient.

Madison’s genius was to understand that the best bulwark against tyranny was not virtue — virtue helps, but should never be relied upon — but ambition counteracting ambition, faction counteracting faction.

[malchior]

Tag this under another CNN personality saying 'Trump became the President' when he clears their apparently super low bar of Presidential behavior.

[Moliere]

CNN’s Jake Tapper Is the Realest Man in “Fake News”

With the leader of the Free World now waging a self-styled war with the media, no journalist on TV has become more indignant, more combative, and suddenly more essential than Jake Tapper. The CNN anchor's ramrod brand of honest outrage has made him a bona fide star and prompted an unlikely question: How, in an age of lies, does a guy make righteous truth-telling so damn entertaining?

[Defiant]

Revealed: how Associated Press cooperated with the Nazis

German historian shows how news agency retained access in 1930s by promising not to undermine strength of Hitler regime

The Associated Press news agency entered a formal cooperation with the Hitler regime in the 1930s, supplying American newspapers with material directly produced and selected by the Nazi propaganda ministry, archive material unearthed by a German historian has revealed.

Associated Press, which has described itself as the “marine corps of journalism” (“always the first in and the last out”) was the only western news agency able to stay open in Hitler’s Germany, continuing to operate until the US entered the war in 1941. It thus found itself in the presumably profitable situation of being the prime channel for news reports and pictures out of the totalitarian state.

In an article published in academic journal Studies in Contemporary History , historian Harriet Scharnberg shows that AP was only able to retain its access by entering into a mutually beneficial two-way cooperation with the Nazi regime.

The New York-based agency ceded control of its output by signing up to the so-called Schriftleitergesetz (editor’s law), promising not to publish any material “calculated to weaken the strength of the Reich abroad or at home”.

The new findings may only have been of interest to company historians, were it not for the fact that AP’s relationship with totalitarian regimes has once again come under scrutiny. Since January 2012, when AP became the first western news agency to open a bureau in North Korea, questions have repeatedly been raised about the neutrality of its Pyongyang bureau’s output.

[malchior]

CNN’s Jake Tapper Is the Realest Man in “Fake News”

With the leader of the Free World now waging a self-styled war with the media, no journalist on TV has become more indignant, more combative, and suddenly more essential than Jake Tapper. The CNN anchor's ramrod brand of honest outrage has made him a bona fide star and prompted an unlikely question: How, in an age of lies, does a guy make righteous truth-telling so damn entertaining?

CNN Is completely schizophrenic. They have Jake Tapper but still give a platform to Jeffrey Lord. Ugh.

[malchior]

CNN puts climate change denier on Earth Day panel and Nye went at him.

[Rip]

Nye is such a buffoon.

I mean he has actually said that Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution says that the government shall promote the progress of science and useful arts.

Ridiculous.

[Fitzy]

Nye is such a buffoon.

I mean he has actually said that Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution says that the government shall promote the progress of science and useful arts.

Ridiculous.

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries

It does literally say that. It also qualifies it, but it is there.

[hepcat]

<Rip frantically searches for alternate version of the Constitution>

[Rip]

Hardly.

It says:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

Which is known as the copyright clause. It in no way says that the government has to fund "Sciences and Useful Arts".

The Copyright Clause has nothing to do with government-funded science, but everything to do with establishing a legal framework to protect intellectual property rights.

[hepcat]

And Nye wasn't saying that the government should do so. He was pointing out the irony of trying to suppress or deny the findings of science when your own constitution obviously believes it should be protected.

Spin little warrior, spin as if your life depended on it!

I give Rip's regurgitated Daily Caller claim a "Pants on Fire" rating.

edit: <Rip frantically searches conservative sites for a Nye quote that can back up his claim>

edit 2: I mistakenly used "irony" above. I should have written "hypocrisy".

[malchior]

Nye might be a total buffoon. Word is that he is a pretty miserable person tbh. I've seen allegations he is the Mr. Pink of scientists but that doesn't make the non-strawman version of his argument wrong. And it certainly doesn't make CNN not be a steaming shit pile that put a scientific fraud on tv to argue garbage science.

[hepcat]

Can you extract a few double negatives from your post so I can parse?

[Rip]

And Nye wasn't saying that the government should do so. He was pointing out the irony of trying to suppress or deny the findings of science when your own constitution obviously believes it should be protected.

Spin little warrior, spin as if your life depended on it!

I give Rip's regurgitated Daily Caller claim a "Pants on Fire" rating.

edit: <Rip frantically searches conservative sites for a Nye quote that can back up his claim>

The government not funding something != suppressing or denying it.

[raydude]

And Nye wasn't saying that the government should do so. He was pointing out the irony of trying to suppress or deny the findings of science when your own constitution obviously believes it should be protected.

Spin little warrior, spin as if your life depended on it!

I give Rip's regurgitated Daily Caller claim a "Pants on Fire" rating.

edit: <Rip frantically searches conservative sites for a Nye quote that can back up his claim>

The government not funding something != suppressing or denying it.

It is much easier to deny climate change if the data doesn't exist.

[Enough]

And Nye wasn't saying that the government should do so. He was pointing out the irony of trying to suppress or deny the findings of science when your own constitution obviously believes it should be protected.

Spin little warrior, spin as if your life depended on it!

I give Rip's regurgitated Daily Caller claim a "Pants on Fire" rating.

edit: <Rip frantically searches conservative sites for a Nye quote that can back up his claim>

The government not funding something != suppressing or denying it.

It is much easier to deny climate change if the data doesn't exist.

And then there is let's hide the cheese.

As an Arctic researcher, I’m used to gaps in data. Just over 1% of US Arctic waters have been surveyed to modern standards. In truth, some of the maps we use today haven’t been updated since the second world war. Navigating uncharted waters can prove difficult, but it comes with the territory of working in such a remote part of the world.

Over the past two months though, I’ve been navigating a different type of uncharted territory: the deleting of what little data we have by the Trump administration.

At first, the distress flare of lost data came as a surge of defunct links on 21 January. The US National Strategy for the Arctic, the Implementation Plan for the Strategy, and the report on our progress all gone within a matter of minutes. As I watched more and more links turned red, I frantically combed the internet for archived versions of our country’s most important polar policies.

I had no idea then that this disappearing act had just begun.

Since January, the surge has transformed into a slow, incessant march of deleting datasets, webpages and policies about the Arctic. I now come to expect a weekly email request to replace invalid citations, hoping that someone had the foresight to download statistics about Arctic permafrost thaw or renewable energy in advance of the purge.

As a member of a GIS listserve for researchers I am seeing folks struggling to find data that used to be easily available online.

[hepcat]

And Nye wasn't saying that the government should do so. He was pointing out the irony of trying to suppress or deny the findings of science when your own constitution obviously believes it should be protected.

Spin little warrior, spin as if your life depended on it!

I give Rip's regurgitated Daily Caller claim a "Pants on Fire" rating.

edit: <Rip frantically searches conservative sites for a Nye quote that can back up his claim>

The government not funding something != suppressing or denying it.

Again: this has zero to do with funding. You read an opinion piece on Daily Beast or something that falsely tried to spin Nye's speech into something it wasn't, then you rushed to OO to parrot it. You didn't even bother to read the transcript for the actual speech in order to verify that he was stating what you wanted to so desperately believe was his point.

He's talking about the overwhelmingly conservative backed denials on climate change, evolution, fossil fuel...take your pick, there's a distressing number to choose from. He's not saying that they're suppressing or denying these proven scientific facts by not funding them. He's point blank saying they're being denied and suppressed. Something easily proven in their own words.

[tjg_marantz]

And yet you still engage

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[hepcat]

And you repeatedly remind us. Which is the bigger waste of time, I wonder?

[Freyland]

Based on post length, it would seem that engaging wins hands down.

[Isgrimnur]

And probably post count as well.

[Max Peck]

So much salt...

[hepcat]

...so little pepper.

[Max Peck]

...so little pepper.

Easily fixed.

[El Guapo]

...so little pepper.

It's spelled "Pepa".

[Isgrimnur]

And they're in effect.

[AWS260]

Tales from the White House press corps:

A handful of reporters had received verbal invitations to an “extended pool” Q. and A. session in Mr. Spicer’s office. The term was a ruse designed to keep those of us from organizations Mr. Trump didn’t like — The Times, The Washington Post, CNN and others — out of the room. We were to wait, like panting poodles at an empty dinner dish, for the transcript.

When I heard about it, I went up to one of Mr. Spicer’s deputies and asked to be included on a standby list. “Sure,” she said, and asked my name cheerfully.

I gave it. She frowned. She said: “I’m sorry, it’s not going to happen. The space is filling up fast.”

I’d be lying if I said it didn’t burn. It’s human nature to feel ashamed at being left out. But the feeling didn’t last. The reporters in the closed-door session burst out, cursing Sean, offering up their recordings, observations and notes so we, the damned, could file our stories first.

It’s hard to get White House reporters — a scheming, scrambling, competitive cat herd — to achieve anything close to solidarity. Mr. Spicer succeeded.

[hepcat]

Eventually Spicer is just going to crack. One day soon, he'll call a press conference in his office, and folks will show up only to find him sitting half naked in a kiddie pool, drunk on toilet wine he made in the WH men's room.

...if personal experience with high pressure is any indication, I should say.