Jump to content

The Media/Journalism Thread


Faulkner

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I agree - and believe me, I've argued that exact point with her many times.  But my mom is one of those if-it's-on-the-Internet-then-it-must-be-true types.  You can't win with people like that, no matter how hard you try.

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

I agree, but these are the people who will be the face of voters for the press. Harris can't do anything right - they set her up for failure at every turn.

It's always BS, but it's the type of story that tends to stick. People look for reasons to cling to Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's not gonna stick for anyone who just doesn't want to vote for her. And I'm sorry, but there is no one coming out of last night in media claiming Harris failed, including the Times and Fox News. It was a rout. Jeremy Peters recycling 'undecideds' is all they have left. We can know the media puts the thumb on the scale and still admit that they have ceded to that reality from last night.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's true.  But I'm also seeing more and more people in this country realizing that the establishment/mainstream media is hopelessly corrupt and therefore not to be trusted.  That's why the MSM are so pissy right now: they've hit at Harris and Walz many times, and so far, nothing's landed, because people are slowly and gradually catching on.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Exactly.  Those idiots are never going to vote for her, no matter what.  They can pretend to be "undecided" all they want, but again, people are starting to catch on.

 

Of COURSE they didn't fact-check her, because she actually had facts and logic on her side.  All Trump has is what he heard Floyd the Barber discuss with Andy, Barney and Gomer Pyle at his barber shop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it's also important to credit media people when they do well. I think David Muir and Linsey Davis were very good last night as moderators. And I think most of the analysis on the major networks and the major papers refreshingly did not equivocate: They were very clear on who won and why. I don't lose sight of what Beltway media is as a larger organism, but I don't think each journalist or commentator is created equal or unequal. MSNBC is a for-profit network which deals with its own issues and mandates, but a lot of their on-air people (like Joy Reid, like Symone Sanders-Townsend, like Maddow, O'Donnell and more) still do not want Trump to win. We can say the same for other people at CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. You never let your guard down in critiquing media, but you allow for a changing situation and nuanced individuals.

The other key is this: Corporate media worships power and hates a loser. They saw power last night and then they saw a loser, and power is what they gravitated to.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't understand Megyn Kelly

Please register in order to view this content

I mean, obviously she's a hack for cash. 

But, she made her name off of criticizing Trump at the 2016 debate.  Now she's trying to pretend fairness is her main issue. 

She was a never-Trumpster.  Now, she's so fearful of transgender people interacting with her kid, that she supports him (as if the president can intervene at her daughter's private school?)

Like, is this the only way she can get press for whatever media outlet still pays her?  And, honestly, does she deserve the amount of focus that she still gets every time she says something dumb for clickbait?

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But, if Megyn Kelly has zero credibility and zero influence (to which I agree), why does she still command multiple headlines every time the media needs to quote a right wing pundit?

Given the recent scandal of Russia paying conservative YouTubers like Dave Rubin $400,000.00 to spread disinformation, the right is doing itself no favors by furthering the narrative that the only reason a person would promote conservative political ideas is for personal profit. 

Also this

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

She's "settling for more." 

Please register in order to view this content

 

You can tell peeps like Jesse Watters want so badly to attack Kamala Harris for being yet one more Black woman who made Donald Trump look like dogshit, but even they are smart to know that when you cross that line, the game is over.

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

    • Chelsea was doing the absolute most today! Why was she introducing her sister to a woman she doesnt know? That whole scene was embarrassing. Madison needs to stay away from her bc she is too immature
    • Gosh, what a waste with Lunacy. Why have her live with $B, reveal Finn, pardon her, etc What makes this story incredibly hollow is that what Luna is asking isn't unreasonable - to spend time with her cousin father. She's not asking to move in with them. How hard with it be for Finn to throw her a bone by, say, I'll meet you for lunch/coffee once at week at the hospital cafeteria. Lunacy isn't going to hurt Finn. In fact, all her crimes were related to finding her father and it turns out to be someone she's loved her entire life. Instead of course-correcting the nonsense of last summer, Brad somehow found a way to make this worse! That's a skill... Of all the younger actors B&B has cast during the past 5 years, LY has shown the most growth and range. Why get rid of her? 
    • On the subject of sets (seems more interesting to discuss than the actual show)  Some sets we don't see anymore Lauren/Michael apartment (haven't seen that in years) Victoria's house (are Marian/Tessa living there?) Apartment above Crimson Lights (I think Chelsea was the last resident) Penthouse (Lily's home) Chancellor Estate (Devon/Abby) Chancellor office (once Dark Horse) Nick's house GCAC room (used as residence/hotel room for several characters) Some of these may pop up again. The tack house,for example, was not seen for many months before being used again. Have I missed anything?
    • Thanks for searching through everything. Worked on them so long, just too lazy to check for those links myself, so I am glad you chose to do it! I guess I never did type out anything for 1973-1977 in regards to the preemptions, but they are on the charts at least (and this far back, they don't seem to do any of those "breakouts" anymore, so things are simpler in the 1970's, so eventually I could type those out). 
    • I dump on the Y&R sets problem all the time, but BOLD is no better -- and they're not even introducing new sets. All of their sets are years old, and very few look like they're inhabited by people with money. Is that going to change with this move? I'd rather they save the money spent on another remote, which is no better than an HGTV travelogue, and get some new/better sets.
    • The donut posts here make up for a Friday show that was barely meh. Aside from seeing Anna, I really didn't care much about anything else. While I understand the thought behind breaking up all the sadness with "other scenes," I'd rather they moved right to John's funeral. Instead of hearing a stupid story about John changing some minor character's tire 20 years ago, just move on to the crying. I also thought the Chad and Cat scenes were a waste. I realize not everyone is devastated by John's death to the point of not functioning, but going sky diving is a choice. By the way, Jack and Jennifer are giving me nothing on this return. Please leave asap. DAYS did such a great job with John's death, so ending the week this way was a letdown.
    • Add Dr. Montgomery to list of fine women on this show! I hope the show goes forward with Madison/Chelsea and then once they're developed, bring back Allison, who is now divorced or a widow, for a Madison/Chelsea/Allison triangle.  It would definitely be the hottest triangle in daytime.  
    • I wonder if Linda Bloodworth-Thomason had Kim in mind for any of her other characters/series. If they intended Allison Sugarbaker (Julia Duffy's character) to be more in line with who Suzanne was/Delta Burke's portrayal-persona, then I think Kim would have aced that. Yes, it would have been odd, Kim having previously played a different character (from a different family), but Designing Women wouldn't have been the first show with that issue. Or maybe Kim could have played Beth Broderick's role on Hearts Afire. Or Patricia Heaton's role on Women of the House.
    • Sony is probably waiting until Y&R’s lease is up as well. All of TV City is going to be gutted, so they have to relocate at some point. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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