Replies

The MSM has proven time again that they are entirely unwilling to cover many of these stories factually and would rather spend their full force and effort on trying to spin, re-frame or change the stories.

I disagree with this statement. I think they diligently attempt to uncover these stories, but when the MSM grossly misreports easily verifiable moments, when they include editorialized characterizations into their reporting, that is what undercuts their strength with their desired consumer - the public. Sure, it titalizes the DNC fanatics to hear such words spoken by anchors, it also alienates the general public.

So when the MSM comes in to disprove some rumor or innuendo or theory, it is viewed through the colored lenses of people the MSM have characterized as being racist homophobic misogynists.

Which gives strength to the theories as the MSM who can't even be trusted to tell you if the sun rose this morning if a Democrat might get slight advantage by a lie, then how can we trust their sudden ability to actually report a story straight?

This is the puzzle that should be keeping every single news director awake at night. The more they disprove outlandish theories, the more power they give those who are pushing the theories, because they've lost the faith of the people they want as consumers for their advertisers.

At the end of the day that's the real elephant in the room - how can MSM work to regain the faith of their viewers who aren't to the left of Maxine Waters?

As for Q & the rest, I'm starting to see the theories and reports penetrate into senior communities who are busy consuming what is uncovered and spreading it amongst themselves and others. That's pretty big. Because that's the group whom have been most loyal to the evening network news broadcasts - if THEY won't believe you anymore, you've really screwed the pooch.