Jump to content

The Media/Journalism Thread


Faulkner

Recommended Posts

  • Members

A tale of two papers. The NYT's take on Trump's bizarre PA rally:

Versus the Post:

I am pleased that most papers and TV media have openly begun addressing the age/competence question with Trump more and more directly and clearly in recent days. But while I actually felt the full NYT article's tone was more bemusement and bafflement than anything else, it is presented in such a bloodless way that it absolutely does sound like attempting to rationalize his behavior yet again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Watched a couple of minutes on CNN about whether Kamala Harris is too scripted or simply disciplined about her messaging. (She appears to have been very frank about it.) I was very pleased with the guest for smoothly referring to the Republican candidate without mentioning his name. Every time I hear the name it reminds me of the Far Side cartoon about what dogs hear and it makes me worry about it translating into votes from people who take that as the message. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

TIME Magazine showing just why Kamala Harris was right to avoid them.

I've been wary of that magazine since an article they had about how gay youth were lost and broken (written by a man who a few years later became an ex-gay activist), and this was the last time they had any relevance:

Please register in order to view this content

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What baffles me is how too many of them (including Jonathan Weisman) now regularly return to 'we have no impact with Trump voters' as an excuse for their coverage. You want to be the greatest paper on Earth but whenever pressed on coverage you say you have no impact?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It is remarkable how off the wall Bret Baier was on Fox tonight - if you don't watch the whole thing you may not see, but he was filibustering and interrupting Harris even before she could begin to delve into his first question. The story emerging in media seems to be not just that Harris was strong and held her own/did well, but that Baier was way out of line. I wonder if this will ever trigger a reevaluation from the Jake Tappers of the world (or Stelter, who was impressed with Harris) who used to ferociously defend the supposed 'old line' journalists at Fox News.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Although I didn’t see the interview, I have seen reports from media outlets like the BBC and CNN say it was combative and that Fox News didn’t even try to engage during the interview, FNC was only interested in a debate, not an interview. And the consensus seems to be, that it was unlikely to change most people’s minds but that the VP held fast to the message that she was intent on delivering.

One analyst also said that it was probably the first time that regular viewers of Fox News channel had ever heard someone speak so directly on these facts about Trump. Meaning, everyone on that channel is too afraid and timid to speak out about how damaging his presidency was and would again be-my interpretation of what the analyst said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It is ironic that Brett Baire says the VP Harris was trying to get a viral anti-Trump moment.  Because why else would she go on Fox, except to get attention?  There's absolutely nothing wrong with that because she is campaigning.  If anything, it only speaks to the Fox bias, that VP Harris didn't expect to get an objective interview.  So, he's just telling on himself.

Also, no matter how inept Trump seemed, I am still not in favor of these town hall meetings with inept people asking questions that have nothing to do with the job of being president.  

Finally, I can't find the clip, but Kyle Clark from Colorado who did that amazing debate with Boebert, had a fantastic followup with a GOP congressional candidate.  The candidate parroted the party line about abortion being up to the state.  So, the journalist countered by asking what other civil rights would the congressmen be willing to put to the plurality?  If the majority of Colorado voters wanted to limit accessible walkways to handicapped citizens, would that be OK?  Kyle Clark is great, and I hope he gets a broader platform.

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Univision's live town halls (with Harris on Oct. 10; and with Trump Oct. 16) had audience members asking relevant questions.

youtube links:
Harris Oct. 10 (Spanish feed) (Link) 
Harris Oct. 10 (English feed) (Link) 
Trump Oct. 16 (Spanish feed) (Link) 
Trump Oct. 16 (English feed) (Link)  

Some of the audience members asked better questions than some news reporters tend to ask.

Edited by janea4old
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, but while the questions about Trump's cabinet not endorsing him was while executed (pardon the pun), the lack of follow up or fact checking, just allows him to spew lies. For example, he said that 90% of his staff endorsed him, when in fact only 4 out of 44 cabinet members from his time in office support him currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy