How do Journalist cover politics in post truth America?

JimH52

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2007
46,728
24,704
2,645
US
Covering politics in a “post-truth” America | Brookings Institution


When we assigned a team of reporters at Politico during the primary season to listen to every single word of Trump’s speeches, we found that he offered a lie, half-truth, or outright exaggeration approximately once every five minutes—for an entire week. And it didn’t hinder him in the least from winning the Republican presidential nomination. Not only that, when we repeated the exercise this fall, in the midst of the general election campaign, Trump had progressed to fibs of various magnitudes just about once every three minutes! So much for truth: By the time Trump in September issued his half-hearted disavowal of the Obama “birther” whopper he had done so much to create and perpetuate, one national survey found that only 1 in 4 Republicans was sure that Obama was born in the U.S., and various polls found that somewhere between a quarter and a half of Republicans believed he’s Muslim. So not only did Trump think he was entitled to his own facts, so did his supporters. It didn’t stop them at all from voting for him.

……………………………………………………………….

Facts may be dead, but here’s one I’ll take with me, and it’s a truth as rock-solid as those Facebook feeds are not: elections, in America or elsewhere, still have consequences.


Journalist today are faced with a delimna that is both unigue and frightening. How do you provide objective coverage to the masses when, even the most powerful man in the world, is promoting and doubling down on extended episodes of serial falsehoods?
 
It is the 'tele-reality' mindset, in which resembling life in maudlin, simplistic fashion is the norm.
 
Covering politics in a “post-truth” America | Brookings Institution


When we assigned a team of reporters at Politico during the primary season to listen to every single word of Trump’s speeches, we found that he offered a lie, half-truth, or outright exaggeration approximately once every five minutes—for an entire week. And it didn’t hinder him in the least from winning the Republican presidential nomination. Not only that, when we repeated the exercise this fall, in the midst of the general election campaign, Trump had progressed to fibs of various magnitudes just about once every three minutes! So much for truth: By the time Trump in September issued his half-hearted disavowal of the Obama “birther” whopper he had done so much to create and perpetuate, one national survey found that only 1 in 4 Republicans was sure that Obama was born in the U.S., and various polls found that somewhere between a quarter and a half of Republicans believed he’s Muslim. So not only did Trump think he was entitled to his own facts, so did his supporters. It didn’t stop them at all from voting for him.

……………………………………………………………….

Facts may be dead, but here’s one I’ll take with me, and it’s a truth as rock-solid as those Facebook feeds are not: elections, in America or elsewhere, still have consequences.


Journalist today are faced with a delimna that is both unigue and frightening. How do you provide objective coverage to the masses when, even the most powerful man in the world, is promoting and doubling down on extended episodes of serial falsehoods?
Well, Obama offered a lie, half-truth, or outright exaggeration approximately once every second for his 8 years of office. What is the big deal for you libtards? Whats good for the goose, is good for the gander? Do as libs say, not as they do? Hmmm?
 
A negative comment on Trump is a defense of Obama? People who hate Obama justify their preferred character's misconduct by citing Obama as an example? There is some seriously confused 'reasoning' going on lately.
 
A negative comment on Trump is a defense of Obama? People who hate Obama justify their preferred character's misconduct by citing Obama as an example? There is some seriously confused 'reasoning' going on lately.
When Obama failed at bringing economic recovery for all the money of QE forever(4 trillion dollars of FAUX money), you libtards cited Bush as the reason for the failure, which we all know was Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd. You just don't like it when we point out how fucked up your ex president was.
 
miketx describes the alt right with his comment.

An attack on Trump is not, per se, a defense of Obama.

Journalists are going to have to pool assets, refuse to interfere people like Conway and Kushner and Bannon, and research every last thing this anti-American admin says.
 
miketx describes the alt right with his comment.

An attack on Trump is not, per se, a defense of Obama.

Journalists are going to have to pool assets, refuse to interfere people like Conway and Kushner and Bannon, and research every last thing this anti-American admin says.
Anti American admin, who wanted to fundamentally transform America? Move to Cuba, the door has been opened for you, just leave your passport at the border, as We the People don't want your sorry liberal ass here anymore.
 
Covering politics in a “post-truth” America | Brookings Institution


When we assigned a team of reporters at Politico during the primary season to listen to every single word of Trump’s speeches, we found that he offered a lie, half-truth, or outright exaggeration approximately once every five minutes—for an entire week. And it didn’t hinder him in the least from winning the Republican presidential nomination. Not only that, when we repeated the exercise this fall, in the midst of the general election campaign, Trump had progressed to fibs of various magnitudes just about once every three minutes! So much for truth: By the time Trump in September issued his half-hearted disavowal of the Obama “birther” whopper he had done so much to create and perpetuate, one national survey found that only 1 in 4 Republicans was sure that Obama was born in the U.S., and various polls found that somewhere between a quarter and a half of Republicans believed he’s Muslim. So not only did Trump think he was entitled to his own facts, so did his supporters. It didn’t stop them at all from voting for him.

……………………………………………………………….

Facts may be dead, but here’s one I’ll take with me, and it’s a truth as rock-solid as those Facebook feeds are not: elections, in America or elsewhere, still have consequences.


Journalist today are faced with a delimna that is both unigue and frightening. How do you provide objective coverage to the masses when, even the most powerful man in the world, is promoting and doubling down on extended episodes of serial falsehoods?
It's easy. The journalists will fall back on how they covered Hillary and Barry. Like, for example, when they found out cankles really did have more than one internet device, devices that did receive and send classified information, or when they found out people weren't able to keep their doctors or health plans and never did realize $2,500.00 annual premium savings. Stuff like that. Most of today's so-called journalists are masters at it.
 
miketx describes the alt right with his comment.

An attack on Trump is not, per se, a defense of Obama.

Journalists are going to have to pool assets, refuse to interfere people like Conway and Kushner and Bannon, and research every last thing this anti-American admin says.
Anti American admin, who wanted to fundamentally transform America? Move to Cuba, the door has been opened for you, just leave your passport at the border, as We the People don't want your sorry liberal ass here anymore.
Those who voted for Trump are a minority in the U.S. Who should move?
 
A negative comment on Trump is a defense of Obama? People who hate Obama justify their preferred character's misconduct by citing Obama as an example? There is some seriously confused 'reasoning' going on lately.

Exactly! It has gotten to the point that Trump lies so much that he cannot be defended. So, the only thing left for the RWers is to bash Obama. It is not about Obama. It is about a fascist, authoritarian who is slowly and surely taking away our freedoms. He stirs his cult into a frenzy, so that they will defend him.

You are all going to wake up one morning when there will only be one point of view allowed in the media world. Trump TV could soon be reality.
 
Can you use the term "journalist" in the same sentence as "truth"?

Seems wrong...


Really? After one of Comrade's surrogates reveals to the world that they will begin propagating "alternative facts", you still have the balls to speak the word truth.

We all know what the Comrade is doing. The more he can erode public confidence in the media world, the more he can spread his "alternative facts", like a farmer spreads manure on a field.

This man is trying to take over media access, scientific freedom, and environmental truths. He is moving a lot faster than many of us thought in implementing the Putin Playbook. I have one suggestion.

RESERVE YOUR RUSSIAN LANGUAGE CLASS NOW!
 

Forum List

Back
Top