CDZ Trump and the press

[Indofred]

I'll make it clear before I go further, I dislike Trump.
However, that doesn't matter for the purpose of this thread.

Guardian journalists denied entry into Donald Trump UK event

Trump appears to have barred several press outlets from his events, all ones that have published negative pieces about him

The question is simple - Is a man who stops sections of the press from entering his events a fit man to be leader of a democracy?

CDZ

 

[william the wie]

Yes, of course

 

[Picaro]

I'll make it clear before I go further, I dislike Trump.
However, that doesn't matter for the purpose of this thread.

Guardian journalists denied entry into Donald Trump UK event

Trump appears to have barred several press outlets from his events, all ones that have published negative pieces about him

The question is simple - Is a man who stops sections of the press from entering his events a fit man to be leader of a democracy?

CDZ

Yes. The 'press' has long ago forfeited its role as a fourth estate in the democratic process, being an objective and unbiased reporter of facts. It's credibility is now totally shot, and hence its influence. It just tabloid smearing gibberish and advocacy propaganda for the most part, especially the Mainstream media.corps. He's right to ban the worst of the vermin.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I'll make it clear before I go further, I dislike Trump.
However, that doesn't matter for the purpose of this thread.

Guardian journalists denied entry into Donald Trump UK event

Trump appears to have barred several press outlets from his events, all ones that have published negative pieces about him

The question is simple - Is a man who stops sections of the press from entering his events a fit man to be leader of a democracy?

CDZ

It doesn't bother me if he bars the, "In the bag for Hillary parasites", most of them are complicit in her and Obama's crimes anyway. They're just serving their masters, journalism has nothing to do with it....

Sadly, without Trump, they may starve...

 

[william the wie]

What's sad about these shills having to work for a living instead of using tear and print?

 

[Lumpy 1]

What's sad about these shills having to work for a living instead of using tear and print?

Now, I call it sarcasm that didn't work out well...

 

[Indofred]

The Guardian is a pretty crappy left wing rag, usually filled with left wing rubbish, and holds Trump in a contempt somewhere just below a dog poo.

Their stories are usually negative of anything right of Karl Marx, making them less than useless as a newspaper as far as I'm concerned.

However, they are a well known paper with a fair size readership so a valid press outlet thus, in my opinion, should be allowed into press events.

Only a dictatorship tries to stop the press printing negative stories, so Trumps refusal to allow them in is disturbing.
At the moment he only has the power to stop them entering his own property, but what if he became president?

Will we see him attempt to curb press freedom?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

SPJ Code of Ethics | Society of Professional Journalists | Improving and protecting journalism since 1909

 

[Indofred]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

Would the Washington post's journalists and their 47 Pulitzer Prizes be considered real?

It seems he banned them as well.

 

[Meathead]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

Would the Washington post's journalists and their 47 Pulitzer Prizes be considered real?

It seems he banned them as well.

The Post was a real newspaper at one time. Now it's become the "Guardian" of America.

 

[Picaro]

I think the National Enquirer and The Onion have a 'fair sized readership, too. Doesn't mean they're suddenly privileged, except that the Onion is deliberately trying to be funny, while the Guardian and Washington Post aren't, they're as 'objective' as the Enquirer is.

There is no 'Code of Ethics' followed by the Media these days. Anybody who believes they do shouldn't be allowed to vote. Journalism died out in the early 1990's, what little there was of it.

 

[Anathema]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

When I see him barring actual Journalists, I'll have a negative reaction. As has already been stated - there is little to no Journalism going on in this country at this time. Just editorial or opinion pieces being called news.

As a fictional character once said.... "Just the facts." THAT is what news stories should provide. Commentary belongs in the editorial and opinion pages.

 

[Indofred]

So, are we saying it's fine to exclude journalist you don't think are up to the job, and anyone who disagrees with you?
If that's the case, press freedom is dead.

 

[Indofred]

As a fictional character once said.... "Just the facts." THAT is what news stories should provide.

News has been messed about with for years, not just of late.
I did a paper round when I was at school, so soon got the hang of which papers were reasonably accurate and which ones were total crap.
I read every one every day so I could get a balanced view of what was really what.
The same applies today, but I read them on the internet.
I read the BBC, the Daily mail (That prints some rubbish), the Guardian, several Israeli papers, 3 Indonesian ones (but one has gone to the dogs so I don't take much note of that), and whatever else I come across when I search for whatever.
I don't read enough stuff from the USA, something I must correct.

 

[Anathema]

News has been messed about with for years, not just of late.
I did a paper round when I was at school, so soon got the hang of which papers were reasonably accurate and which ones were total crap.
I read every one every day so I could get a balanced view of what was really what.
The same applies today, but I read them on the internet.
I read the BBC, the Daily mail (That prints some rubbish), the Guardian, several Israeli papers, 3 Indonesian ones (but one has gone to the dogs so I don't take much note of that), and whatever else I come across when I search for whatever.
I don't read enough stuff from the USA, something I must correct.

I agree news has been tainted for a long time. Don't waste your time on US papers unless you need something to wrap fish in or for you dog to poo on.

 

[Picaro]

So, are we saying it's fine to exclude journalist you don't think are up to the job, and anyone who disagrees with you?
If that's the case, press freedom is dead.

No we aren't saying it's fine to exclude journalists; we're saying it's fine if he excludes hacks and tabloid propagandists. They don't count as 'press', and neither does the Washington Post.

As for 'reading stuff' from the USA', you'll get more U.S. news from the Economist than you will the U.S. press, and that mag is biased, too, but it at least offers multiple sides of an issue occasionally.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

Would the Washington post's journalists and their 47 Pulitzer Prizes be considered real?

It seems he banned them as well.

I suppose that depends on if you consider the Pulitzer Prize winners actual journalists or merely recipients of a corrupted system.. The problem now-a-days is that journalists and their organizations speak of integrity and rules of guidance but it seems standards of journalism being followed is now a pitiful joke. Is there any doubt that the New York Times, Boston Globe or the Los Angeles Times have zero ethics and are completely in the bag for liberal causes and actual truth has little value to them?

Pulitzer Prize - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[320 Years of History]

The question is simple - Is a man who stops sections of the press from entering his events a fit man to be leader of a democracy?

No.

 

[jwoodie]

Just sayin... when he bars actual journalist, then it's a problem.

Would the Washington post's journalists and their 47 Pulitzer Prizes be considered real?

It seems he banned them as well.

I suppose you are a big fan of the Nobel Peace Prize, too.

 

[Indofred]

I agree news has been tainted for a long time. Don't waste your time on US papers unless you need something to wrap fish in or for you dog to poo on.

The UK press is just as bad, probably worse, but is banning them reasonable in a free country?

I wonder if any other potential presidents have banned reporters from large national papers.