real journalists don't spend a lot of time on the offspring of candidates personal lives. Your garbage propaganda goes on forever about Hunter about 6 year old things that have all been discredited multiple times..,
Trump wants to be pals with Putin and the Chinese guy and the north Korean guy and wants to be a Moscow oligarch. he's too mobbed up to be caught, he did all this in public. he told the Russians in a speech to go ahead and hack Hillary and he needed all the help he could get. And then they did LOL in a Big big way... maybe you think that's just great. did you hear about Murdoch saying in court that his pundits did not believe the election steel garbage or even like Trump. Your propaganda machine is a disgrace and so are you for not checking all these ridiculous "facts"... when in the entire free world only one TV station and two newspapers agree with you... hello?!
I don't think you read what I write. Which is fine, join 99.999999999999999% of the rest of Americans, but then .. you shouldn't "answer" it by just repeating your general views. It's not convincing to anyone.
You evidently think mainstream American journalism is just fine. They are the people whom we should get our information from. They never lie, never distort facts, never present things one-sidedly, never suppress facts that would tend to discredit their own liberal political views.
On the one hand we have the terrible liars of Fox News, etc. On the other, the Genuine Journalists of the
New York Times,
Washington Post, etc., lighting up the room with the glow of their halos, fearlessly investigating those in power, even if they are Democrats.
Okay. You believe that, my side doesn't.
AND ... it's not just my side. Have a look here:
This lady is no rightwinger. Rightwingers who read her columns are warned now: you might get a heart attack!
Actually, I'm sorry to say this, but it's the serious Left who have done the best job investigating the so-called impartiality of the American mainstream media.
If ever there was an academic Devil-figure on the Right -- the professorial equivalent of George Soros -- it's Noam Chomsky. [
Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia ]
People on my side of the barricades have to cross themselves three times if they even hear his name being uttered. And for good reason: he's a genius and he's a leftwinger
par excellence. From his Wiki bio:
Since retiring from active teaching at MIT, he has continued his vocal political activism, including opposing the
2003 invasion of Iraq and supporting the
Occupy movement. Chomsky began teaching at the
University of Arizona in 2017.
One of the most cited scholars alive, Chomsky has influenced a broad array of academic fields. He is widely recognized as having helped to spark the
cognitive revolution in the
human sciences, contributing to the development of a new
cognitivistic framework for the study of language and the mind. In addition to his continued scholarship, he remains a leading critic of
U.S. foreign policy, contemporary
state capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the
IsraeliāPalestinian conflict, and
mass media. Chomsky and his ideas are highly influential in the
anti-capitalist and
anti-imperialist movements.
Whoa! Smell the brimstone! (Warning to my fellow Rightists -- extended exposure to this man's writing has been known to cause the equivalent of severe radiation poisoning in good patriots. You have been warned!)
He doesn't agree that the mass media are upright and honest and truthful. In fact, he and a colleague wrote a pretty good book on how the media work, called
Manufacturing Consent. Here's a summary: [
Manufacturing Consent - Wikipedia ]
The Amazon summary is more succinct than the Wiki one. (By the way, you can pick up a copy on Amazon for $10 right now.) Here it is. The first quote is by the late Walter LaFeber, whose field was American diplomatic history (and who taught me American history at university).
"[A] compelling indictment of the news media's role in covering up errors and deceptions in American foreign policy of the past quarter century." āWalter LaFeber, The New York Times Book Review
In this pathbreaking work, now with a new introduction, Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky show that, contrary to the usual image of the news media as cantankerous, obstinate, and ubiquitous in their search for truth and defense of justice, in their actual practice they defend the economic, social, and political agendas of the privileged groups that dominate domestic society, the state, and the global order.
Based on a series of case studiesāincluding the media's dichotomous treatment of "worthy" versus "unworthy" victims, "legitimizing" and "meaningless" Third World elections, and devastating critiques of media coverage of the U.S. wars against IndochinaāHerman and Chomsky draw on decades of criticism and research to propose a Propaganda Model to explain the media's behavior and performance.
Their new introduction updates the Propaganda Model and the earlier case studies, and it discusses several other applications. These include the manner in which the media covered the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement and subsequent Mexican financial meltdown of 1994-1995, the media's handling of the protests against the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund in 1999 and 2000, and the media's treatment of the chemical industry and its regulation.
What emerges from this work is a powerful assessment of how propagandistic the U.S. mass media are, how they systematically fail to live up to their self-image as providers of the kind of information that people need to make sense of the world, and how we can understand their function in a radically new way.
Anyway, serious people should by no means believe everything they hear on Fox, or Breitbart, or the
Epoch Times, etc. etc. But neither should they trust the mainstream media.
