It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Liberal Media vs. President Trump--89% negative

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




Your source is an anti-liberal site who's only mission is to report against liberal media.

So what else would you expect them to say???

They are pushing their own bias against liberal media.

Amazing how easy it is to find sh*t when you look in the sewer. Great reporting.



Where did they go wrong in their study? Did you even read it? Until you can point out where, you are merely pushing your own bias, and accusing others of which only you are guilty.




posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Did we really need a study to tell us This?


no, most of us already knew that trump is dumb as a box of rocks when it comes to running a country, but his family is making millions off his election, and you people are bitching about the "media".....if this was Obama's family, he would have already been impeached



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: uncommitted

The news media is used to pit L vs R.

The news media is used to outrage the citizens to do things the string pullers (TPTB) want.

The news media (and advertising) is growing less and less relevant, and they know it.

The news media has never been more dangerous, it is in the last grasping breath of power- very dangerous.

I am neither R or L- I am a logical believer we are in deep doo doo.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I totally agree with your post. But I do not agree with the idea that the media is "liberal". I will agree with the claim the media is "liberal" when I hear multiple stories organizing labor to strike with companies who purchase advertising.

There's no doubt the stories are negative. But my thinking is the media outlets will say anything that is a half truth as long as it is controversial. These stories are "hooks" for a reason. If you want more balanced news then you can't have it be for-profit.

Rage = Ratings = Money



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: uncommitted

The news media (and advertising) is growing less and less relevant, and they know it.

The news media has never been more dangerous, it is in the last grasping breath of power- very dangerous.

I am neither R or L- I am a logical believer we are in deep doo doo.


logical, since your source is unbiased, maybe the ones this article is targeted to, can hold their breath and wait for a similar analysis on conservative media and their positive coverage of trump, right?

an unbiased source would naturally show more than one studies in an effort to weigh and compare the truths of their claims right?
edit on 19-4-2017 by odzeandennz because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

That is true and not true.

I assume, and yes assume, that there is a market out there for news that is just the truth. And I would imagine it would be impossible to get a consistent advertising revenue flow. News should be biting the hands that feed them, we do not usually see that.

Ahhh profits- the good the bad and the ugly.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
The media is against Trump? The media is Liberal? According to a study that is exactly what is going on.


As President Trump approaches the end of his first 100 days in office, he has received by far the most hostile press treatment of any incoming American president, with the broadcast networks punishing him with coverage that has been 89% negative. The networks largely ignored important national priorities such as jobs and the fight against ISIS, in favor of a news agenda that has been dominated by anti-Trump controversies and which closely matches what would be expected from an opposition party.
www.newsbusters.org...

MRC reviewed the alphabets coverage and it is dismal. Jan 20th to April 9th the study looked at coverage and it was one sided.


For this study, MRC analysts reviewed all of ABC, CBS and NBC’s evening news coverage of Trump and his new administration from January 20 through April 9, including weekends. Coverage during those first 80 days was intense, as the networks churned out 869 stories about the new administration (737 full reports and 132 brief, anchor-read items), plus an additional 140 full reports focused on other topics but which also discussed the new administration.




Do you have to be liberal or conservative to recognize failure?

Nope.

I am as conservative as it gets when it comes to the federal government gaining power, but I think Trump is an idiotic president so far. His policy ideas as well. People seem to be confused by the old good deeds vs good intentions problem.

Trump is great at pointing out problems, and clueless as to how and solve them.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Perhaps we are jumping the gun? When I saw a bunch of "news" anchors crying after the election, I knew we were screwed.

It isn't going to matter what Trump does for some. Of course he can't get anything done, he is an outsider and the insiders are throwing every anchor they have out. Get used to it.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I don't believe that.

I think he is a profiteer looking to advance his legacy and his children.

Or else he would have policy ideas instead of empty talk and then rediculous policy ideas. That is politics as usual.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Ok all opinions are welcome.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

That was quite informative, thank you. (Though it was for 2016 and not 15 as your link title says).

I seriously asked the question because I don't know anyone who does. I'm not a Republican and I live in Mass. which is pretty liberal, I have very conservative and very liberal family members. I can't remember the last time someone mentioned something about the evening news cast. I guess about 24 million people still watch them, according to the article. With about 130 million people voting in the election, that would be about a fifth of the voters.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

Where did they go wrong in their study? Did you even read it? Until you can point out where, you are merely pushing your own bias, and accusing others of which only you are guilty.


Oh lord please try and keep your judgements to yourself and just honestly look at what's being said here.

I've already stated that there is a bias of plenty coming from both sides. I'm not promoting or suggesting one over the other or anything of the sort. I am simply pointing out the fact that the source site is included within the large and growing list of heavily biased pseudo news blog sites that are out there. It is their stated goal in fact to push against the liberal media. You can't get any more obvious than that.

However, just me pointing that out, which should be clear to anyone on the planet since it is stated in plain text for you to read on that very site. You are now pointing to me as being not only biased but the "only" one guilty of bias!!! How very neutral and logical and reasonable you are sir!! Your balance in weighing such judgements is evidently not as superior as your ability to craft a convincing word, which is something you do quite well as I've complimented you on many times. But your blaming me for something I'm not doing nor have any intent on doing. I'm simply pointing out a FACT about the source that one should consider, that is all. But do what you want if it makes you happy, that seems to be the only direction anyone is inclined to travel anyway these days, so why would you be any different.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Just out of curiosity which policy decisions do you believe Trump has succeeded with and stands to be successful with? Given the info we have right now.

Not ideas or talk but the action part where he doesn't make a unilateral decision.
edit on 19-4-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Doesn't matter. Even the biased, the stupid, and the dishonest can be right. It's a fallacy to discount a source based on where it comes from and not its contents.

So what's wrong with their findings?



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Well let's look at their example of the apparently unjustified negative reporting about Trumps policy changes during his first 100 days.

The Travel ban
The ObamaCare Replacement
Immigration Roundup
Russian stuff
etc.

Apparently reporting these as being negative was uncalled for according to this site. Because as we all know they were all so successful after all. I recall the dancing in the streets about what great ideas he had for these things and how well they were implemented. Sarcasm aside, the reporting I imagine was negative because they all sucked and were hardly worthy of positive news coverage. Some of them even were being denounced by both sides of the political isle as well as the rest of the populace. So I'd say negative reporting on those was probably pretty much on target.

Were they perhaps more negatively reported on than needed??? Maybe. But then, like you say, Bias doesn't mean inaccurate all the time either. Although I wouldn't include dishonest in there like you did. I would think dishonest would in fact be more than just bias.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

That's a better way to go about it. I think we can agree that most of the reporting is negative, like the article states. Whether that is up to bias or not is up for debate.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I think we may have to get our microwave fast expectations in line with reality.

A little over 3 months is a very short time to get upset about. As far as what successes he has- I guess I would say he is starting to rebuild the US as a global leader.

The late 60's-mid 70's is when the corp lobbyist starting buying America. And since then the US population on a whole has suffered.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Sure, I'd agree that most of the reporting is negative. Especially when only looking at a few select media outlets. However I wouldn't exactly say that the negative reporting isn't clearly justified either. When looking at a failure of a policy idea there are only so many ways to try and spin it positively after all so you're basically left with having to report what is obvious to everyone, that it sucked.

I do think media has a tendency to report negative stuff more than positive too as it sells better. But sometimes it's negative because it just is.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm



Sure, I'd agree that most of the reporting is negative. Especially when only looking at a few select media outlets. However I wouldn't exactly say that the negative reporting isn't clearly justified either. When looking at a failure of a policy idea there are only so many ways to try and spin it positively after all so you're basically left with having to report what is obvious to everyone, that it sucked.

I do think media has a tendency to report negative stuff more than positive too as it sells better. But sometimes it's negative because it just is.


Journalism should be neither negative nor positive, but neutral. Journalistic objectivity is an ethical concern, and positive or negative spin is a sign of bias.



posted on Apr, 19 2017 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Well, I think positive and negative reporting should in a way be apparent based on the story. A mass shooting or serial rapist story I don't think would have too many positive ways of being told after all.

Or in the case of the Obamacare replacement thing, basically nobody from either side or the populace at large had anything good to say about that. The only pro people for that were the few trying to sell it and even they turned on each other and blamed each other for what a mess it was. That also I don't know how else but negative you could really report that one.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join