Naked and proud: Media tripling down on blatant anti-Trump sentiment

Hill, the ^ | 23 November 2016 | Joe Concha

[Lorianne]

Before we head home for what will undoubtedly be a raucous holiday weekend of conversation, let's first look back at last two weeks since the unlikely election on Donald Trump

from a media perspective.

Later in the morning after the Republican was officially declared the winner, we started hearing from various voices in the industry about a need for self-education to glean what lessons were learned. The introspection was a necessary one, after all, only because by all accounts the media — broadcast, print, online and otherwise — got failing grades for its performance.

It was an election season where journalists openly and defiantly declared that objectivity could be thrown out the window in the name of stopping a dangerous candidate. Neutrality was no longer an option. Judgement day was coming for anyone not on the take-out-Trump-train.

Journalistic felonies were discovered far and wide during the campaign season. Stories shared in advance with campaigns. Debate questions shared in advance with campaigns. Outright collusion. Blatant cheerleading. Wikileaks exposed what many suspected about the press all along: they're operatives, not journalists.

[proust]

The endless abuse of a platform held up by public trust. Shameful.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Shut them down. It’s time.

[Sans-Culotte]

Henceforth conservatives should always view the MSM as enemies. An interview with the MSM should be approached as if the MSM are prosecuting attorneys in a trial setting.

[I want the USA back]

The media didn’t wait a second to gin up discontent for Trump. Their avowed purpose for the next 4 years will be to trash Trump every chance they get.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Wikileaks exposed what many suspected about the press all along: they're operatives, not journalists.

Here’s the point people don’t get: journalists presumptively are ”operatives." Journalists claim, either directly or by implication, that all journalists are objective. That is a fatuous claim with no intellectually respectable support:

• No one can know that they themselves - let alone anyone else - is objective.

• It is respectable, even admirable, to try to be objective - and it is acceptable to claim to be trying to be objective (if that is true). But, ironically, the claim actually to be objective forecloses the possibility of an honest and diligent effort towards objectivity. For candor about any and all reasons why you might not be objective is sine qua non for any honest effort towards objectivity - and that is precisely the opposite of a claim of actual objectivity.
• In case any journalists have difficulty imagining why they might not be objective, here is a hint. “If it bleeds, it leads.” “'Man Bites Dog’ not ‘Dog Bites Man.’” Journalism as a profession is negative towards society.

  SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

  Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others. - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

  People who conflate “society” and “government,” therefore, manifest cynicism towards society - and naivete towards government. Cynicism toward society is the tendency of any journalist who is on the lookout only for stories which will trumpet the failings and limitations of the people upon whom society most depend. And naïveté towards government is evident whenever anyone insinuates that government can and should improve society. This combination is characteristic of socialism. Clearly, journalists have a natural bias toward socialism.

. . . More Amanpour from Tuesday night's acceptance speech:

Don't stand for being labelled crooked or lying or failing.
Do stand up together--for divided we will all fall.

Journalist do “stand together.” They are united by the incentives I mentioned above - and they are bound together by their continuous virtual meeting via the AP “wire.” And that is a problem. We have a press - when our system is predicated on the existence of multiple free, independent presses. Rather than multiple fronts for one press.

[Bodega]

I agree. The media is a major senseless organ.

I have a terminal academic degree (PhD) and a terminal professional degree (DVM) and an MS in Nursing with a Family Nurse Practitioner speciality. I voted for Trump after exhaustively examining his background, the people who work for him and their comments, how often he was considered to be a crook, and so on. I could find nothing that was awful or even bad...sometimes a questionable choice of paths leading to minor disasters. And a machismo I don’t admire. BUT...

I then compared Trump’s agenda and Clinton’s agenda. (I knew beyond a peradventure of a certainly she was dishonest, a socio/ possibly psychopath and a possible sex addict. But what absolutely threw her to the trash heap was her relationship to Alinsky, Soros, Globalism, unfettered Muslim migration, her horrifically blatant betrayal of the USA in Libya, etc. etc. I did then read the Qu’ran and that is when I understood what would happen here...and we were in the midst of watching the degradation of Europe. I couldn’t believe the ignorance of the press about the meaning of Islam or the consequences of no birth control or no schooling on the masses of Muslims heading to Europe. Yes, any number of us in “:rural” American understood exactly what was happening and going to happen in Europe. Clearly none of you ever heard about the Muslim of Europe lo those hundreds of years ago. Amazing.

Being rural, “provincial” and ignorant, so I am told, I did then vote for Trump. And I will not respect nor read your drivel anymore. I want facts, nothing but the fact and I want you to stop Politically Correct speech. I am not much caring if the Muslims or Baptists or Evangelicals or anyone is offended. A spade is a spade and the truth or as near as we can get to it trumps the media gibberish. [Yes, I know...groan!]

[Bodega]

Sorry. THis letter was sent to Wash Examiner after one of the media hacks “explained” how they failed. They failed because they didn’t listen and if they did, they didn’t understand.