Donald Trump threatens to 'take away media's credentials' over negative news stories about him

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Because staying informed requires you to be informed of all angles of an argument. Even the ones you don't like or make you uncomfortable.

Or even if it's true or will be retracted.

Knowing if it is true or not requires staying informed. Most of you just label it as untrue right at the source line without even reading the content.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I am judging them by the sheer number of politically motivated hit pieces and the number of corrections and retracted stories. That's not news.

I'm not one to make the claim of Trump playing 4d chess or anything, but he is and has been playing the media like his own personal monkey grinder. He did win the election due to the press giving him much more air time than Her, and they continue to give him free press, albeit bad, but as anyone in the business knows, there is no such thing as bad press. So it's likely we will see another 4 years of Trump, thanks in large part, to the MSM who claims to hate him. (In reality, they love him, as he gives them $$ in ratings) And when that happens, those of us who don't hate Trump, will be smiling bigly as we don't really like the lefties who cry a lot. (at least I don't)

Keep drinking the Hatoraid bitches.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yeah, because the right NEVER writes politically motivated hit pieces against the left when they are in charge, right? Hell, Breitbart's entire MO is to write hit pieces against the left. I'll repeat myself: I'd be more apt to believe you if you guys would call out your own propaganda outlets as often as you call out CNN.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not you, I'm not partisan, remove all credentials unless they maintain an unbiased fair and accurate reporting.

Everyone else can be uncredentialed bloggers.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Lovely.

I mean, you have totally failed to justify an assault on elements of the media, a group who fall under the protection provided by freedom of the press, and whose utterances are also protected by the same laws which permit you to say what you will, without legal challenge, a right you indulge in without the slightest bashfulness.

And yet the protections offered the press and the person alike clearly mean next to nothing to you. How noble you are, to take advantage of a freedom that you would gladly deny to others, despite the very notion of so doing, being alien to the constitution you falsely claim to covet.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ok. You are right. You have a straw man argument erected, with "the right" and what "they" say playing the lead role.

Meanwhile ignore that the white house press are not there by right. And removing them has zero effect on their free speech.

There is no basis for your argument. Which was what i said the first time you used it.

Freedom of the Press is guaranteed by the First Amendment, the role of Fourth Estate and is essential for Democracy to function, the ability of the press to counteract government Press Releases/Relations and question/scrutinise it is essential to balance out the government propaganda (all countries/companies do this Propaganda had to be renamed PR post WW2 as it had gained a bad rep). The US already has low press freedom thanks to Obama being sandwiched in between Belarus and Botswana.

The US Press are failing the public badly in their duty as the co modification of news means investigative journalism has been replaced by 90% of US news being cut and pasted stories from AP and Reuters. The US Press badly needs a ethical independent Code of Conduct and Complaints Commission like we have in the UK and have little problem with journalists being stripped of their credentials/press pass if they break such a code but taking them away just because they're negative is continuing Obama's move towards dictatorship.

Hopefully the Press start producing good journalism worthy of the name (this is an international problem as the internet and access to free news means there's little/no incentive to spend millions and years on investigations if cheap over sensationalised gutter press churnalism/viewspapers make more money and one journo can write five to ten stories per day so the news org fires 80% of staff to cut costs further).

This entire topic is ridiculous. Fox news, one of Trump's babies (because it kisses his butt), has been quite low on the fact-o-meter in the past (before Trump took office), with many of their stories being either partially untrue, mostly untrue, or just plain wrong (with often much lower accuracy than CNN). Yet somehow, only the media sources who dare print negativity about Trump are the ones that should be considered "fake?" Please... so much hypocrisy around this, it's simply laughable.

ALL major news sources produce "fake" (i.e. not properly vetted, trying to be the first to publish a story) news, or news produced with a slant that indicates the news sources bias or political leaning. ALL of them. Even those sources that supposedly are standing up for news accuracy and freedom for everyone to know all, are still biased and produce stories that they feel are important.

Anyone would be a fool to trust ANY of them. But freedom of the press.. it applies to all. Not just those who kiss Trump's fat orange butt. Use your own head to look at stories from multiple sources, and by doing that, figure out the real story.

But clearly some of you can't think for yourselves. You need Trump to tell you which news sources are "good and accurate" (hahaha) and which are "bad?" Sheeple much? Make up your own mind, and understand how MSM works.. and has ALWAYS worked, well before Trump took office.

Fact: Trump has incredibly thin skin, and can't take criticism to save his life. That is why he attacks those sources. His ego won't allow for negativity against him.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So, once again, a great big fat deflection.

This is my surprised face...

Psst...not sure you noticed....but you and I are arguing the same points here.....

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
He is clearly king after all. The media needs to pony up right?

Donald Trump has suggested he could “take away credentials” of media organisations over negative stories about him.

“The Fake News is working overtime.” the US president tweeted. ”Just reported that, despite the tremendous success we are having with the economy & all things else, 91% of the Network News about me is negative (Fake).

“Why do we work so hard in working with the media when it is corrupt? Take away credentials?”

Ironically he likely got this idea from a segment aired on Fox News of all places:

The billionaire appeared to be responding to a segment on his favourite cable news show, Fox & Friends, which aired figures collated by Media Research Center (MRC), a right-wing media watchdog.

Source

Fox News. The news that stood front and center when Bush declared 'mission accomplished' in 2003.

Putting aside that this is yet another outlandish statement made by Trump that his supporters would much prefer to skip over (and discuss positive twitter posts about him instead) how will he go about taking away these credentials? What process or structure will he put in place to make these sweeping government decisions to silence the media? Is he going to have a panel of appointed officials dictate laws to the media? Is he going to have government media monitors? What's the indicators of fake news? What rules will he put in place? How much tax money will he throw at this? The idea is out of this world and if this was Obama saying this I bet this forum would be splitting heads right now with thread content on this. But it's Trump, and we just take what he says with a grain of salt. No consequences to his comments that threaten the sanctity of Democracy and Freedom.

Another day I guess. Move along.

"Freedom of Speech".U. S. A.... Not United States of Trump.. Ridiculous...but he is getting away with everything..

Hey! I get it. This is 1 of his "fake news" items...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not you, I'm not partisan, remove all credentials unless they maintain an unbiased fair and accurate reporting.

Everyone else can be uncredentialed bloggers.

Ok. So nobody?

He is trying to get control of fake and false reporting is all......

Well considering 99% of the negative news stories end up being false, they are basically the same thing. But sure, tell yourself he's just going after the "negative" news outlets if it makes you feel better. Still fake though.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not you, I'm not partisan, remove all credentials unless they maintain an unbiased fair and accurate reporting.

Everyone else can be uncredentialed bloggers.

Ok. So nobody?

Exactly.

Grow a media that at least won't run with salacious reports to get views, then issue a fine print correction a week later.

a reply to: Erich94

Bravo, very good post. An accurate & fair appraisal of the situation, at least from my perspective as an weary Brit across the Atlantic. The media style, content, intent & 'justification' in the US is utterly terrible across the majority of platforms, networks, the ownership 'Hydra Corp/s' etc. The system is utterly corrupt, but it goes so much further than media too. How much ground can be reclaimed after thirty years of insanity?

If the USA leadership are effectively 'in charge' of the Western world, then we all, globally, have a stake in seeing that that leadership is at least reasonable & honest in philosophy & functionally competent, with some measure of an application of equable justice, in its government. At the moment, it seems that no less than all-out war is going on behind the scenes - spilling across the boundary onto the global stage. Where will it lead?

The younger generations have been conditioned to be docile, passive, distracted & apathetic, coasting along with no great & powerful dreams, no drive of divine fire in their hearts. That's no BS, they really have spiritually shackled us, brainwashing us to believe that the fogged mind, the weight of economic burden, is normal.. We have suffered indoctrination, then allow our kids to be indoctrinated - at the hands of a global corporate elite which has spread its tentacles into all areas of government control. They have desired in their plan at minimum that we are 'compliant' as a workforce (Rockerfeller, a hundred years ago), incapable of breaking out of the socioeconomic stratum in which we began. Uppermost in their hopes, apparently, they desire the annihilation of the majority of the world's population, with minimum environmental disruption, so as to rebuild it in their image, using hoarded technologies & applying their 'de facto' limitless resources. A paradise on Earth, in which only the economically uppermost planetary denizens are permitted to exist, in a future of their design, which only God fully knows by what measure hideous, shallow, self-centred & ultimately self-destructive it shall become.

Are we so blind, collectively, that this can actually be rolled out under our noses? It's monstrous. In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.. Each person who has eye/s to see can pass on what he or she knows, but this can only be done indirectly, because the human race is in a state of hypnotic control - literally. There have been tens of thousands of broadcasts in the past thirty years which utilise literal psychological techniques to place post-hypnotic 'directives' in the minds of the public. Such that a concerned, informed, critically-thinking citizen is in fact a dangerous, deluded, subversive 'conspiracy theorist'. Using nomenclature as a badge of shame - a badge which alerts you that well-informed, creative & even-handed thinkers cannot be believed, trusted, or accepted in polite society. Mention anything which contradicts the prevailing (programmed) official narrative on social media, and you'll soon find yourself socially lynched - a pariah with far fewer friends, far less engagement from 'friends', even extending into real-world effects such as loss of business contracts, etc.

Because of this, you cannot make suggestions in an overt, front-facing & transparent manner - you will be ignored, rebuffed, knocked back with palpable force. Instead, utilise the same methods which the programmers used: subtle, subliminal content using either visuals or sound recordings, or video, in which nuggets of truth can be presented in a 'trail of breadcrumbs' manner. Lay down some subconscious wake up!

Banksy, the graffiti artist, is a great example of the archetypal 'warrior of truth' in this inevitably deceptive 'First Age of Information. He applies his work in the tangible real world, and lets the digital world radiate his message as a reflection, an echo, a beacon. His work has contributed to greater social understanding & greater effort towards change, across the entire political spectrum. His artwork makes a strong, ethical & reasonably weighted comment regarding a particular social problem/ illusory beliefs, and the people start thinking together. Coherence breaks down the artificial barriers between segments of society - such as right or left, middle or working class - and has the power to take us forward. People working together & questioning the narrative is the only way that the darkness creeping across our society is halted. And don't be deceived! The darkness creeps in from all sides, through both the Left & the Right, the public & private sector, corrupt law enforcement & the underworld - though it leaves just enough apparent independence & normalcy in place, so that its darkest deeds can hidden by a veneer of ethical politics, behind the natural defensive line formed by the honest politicians & judiciary, those who genuinely care.

The only way to respond is by subtle, subliminal response, made viral where possible, consistently honest & apolitical, ethical in the utmost & fearless, indomitable in spirit. Intelligence Services propaganda operations are the model for action, and indeed there's probably enough of them who care about the resistance, such that they won't obstruct, or even possibly they may assist - who knows? The Internet in its current form (which probably won't remain suited to free speech for too long) is the greatest weapon we could hope for. Infecting social media with positive affirmations of life, liberty, equity & hope, is the only counter-measure standing any chance of multiplying & persisting for long enough in 'the system' for tangible effects to arise. We really must appreciate the severity of the threat which has been rotting the foundations of civilised society in a venomous, vicious manner, deliberately so, for over thirty years - at minimum. The game they play is as old as Time, through cycles of greater or lesser awareness, greater or lesser domination of the honest, genial people in all strata of the life of the nation. They seem to think that the world is poised on the edge of an ascension to their grandest hope - and they've become greedy as a result. Which made them reckless, and exuberant in their enjoyment of the promotion & success of deception strategies & wholesale death, and worse.

Which made it a little too obvious.

Which gives us a chance.

When we've done all that we can, that's when God steps in to do what we can't. It's the modern-day 'Good Fight'.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not you, I'm not partisan, remove all credentials unless they maintain an unbiased fair and accurate reporting.

Everyone else can be uncredentialed bloggers.

Ok. So nobody?

Exactly.

Grow a media that at least won't run with salacious reports to get views, then issue a fine print correction a week later.

I see that as impossible. News is written by humans. Humans are biased by instinct. It's damn near impossible for a human to give information without showing a bit of its biases. So until news is written totally by machines your idea will just make it so the government never gets reported on. I think I'd rather just accept the bias in the the news and use my own intelligence to weed through it. Personal accountability and all.

Bad idea Freedom of the press is just as important as freedom of speech..


I just wouldn't call on them for questions is all....

Captain contradiction strikes again!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Sorry I'm not you, I'm not partisan, remove all credentials unless they maintain an unbiased fair and accurate reporting.

Everyone else can be uncredentialed bloggers.

Ok. So nobody?

Exactly.

Grow a media that at least won't run with salacious reports to get views, then issue a fine print correction a week later.

I see that as impossible. News is written by humans. Humans are biased by instinct. It's damn near impossible for a human to give information without showing a bit of its biases. So until news is written totally by machines your idea will just make it so the government never gets reported on. I think I'd rather just accept the bias in the the news and use my own intelligence to weed through it. Personal accountability and all.

That's almost verbatim what my journalism professors taught me (though they used alien instead of machine) and is part of the press accreditation (NCTJ). Journalists are meant to declare their biases on an ethical basis as a result but sadly because of the gutting of the newsroom by proprietors there are few with any ethics left.

The trick is to learn how to undo it by comparing it to the original articles written by AP and Reuters, applying a few analytical frameworks and a solid background in the writings of Bernaise, Packard, Curtis, Fisk and read from a variety of news sources to get a good overview. Like the UK, the US has intel agents working in a lot of national news desks but I don't have an up to date list of who/which ones - as a rule they cover foreign affairs and have the title 'from our correspondent' but more open ones like the Torygraph display their full name.

If there is provable "Fake news" being created, then the journalist AND his/her editor should both be given a strike..

Three and you're out. Completely. No more job for you. No job prospects in that field either since you've proved you can't do it.

You guys need a non-partisan watchdog group for this, no government intervention until strikes are given. No overriding strikes for partisanship either.