Login

The Media Gets It Wrong About the Pro-Trump Media Alternatives

The alternatives are thriving because the mainstream press drips with contempt for half the nation.

UPDATE: Add the MS-13 stuff as another data point. The President referred to the gang members as "animals" and the media is expressly trying to claim he referred to all immigrants that way.


I've seen a number of reporters and people you and I would commonly agree are "journalists" lament this Axios report on the rise of a "pro-Trump media machine." Most thought Trump voters are just trying to find places that tell them all Trump's lies are true or something.

I have to tell you as someone who has been a Trump critic and, during the election, "Never Trump," I totally get the pro-Trump disdain for the modern American media.

Just let me give a quick focus on CNN, a network I hold in very high regard. CNN went full anti-second amendment in its coverage post-Parkland. It was very difficult throughout its day part to get objective news. Everything was geared toward gun activism.

The same thing happens in much of CNN's coverage of cultural issues, from how it covers Christian bakers forced to bake cakes and transgender issues. By and large, CNN offers good coverage and has some excellent anchors and newsmen. But then it also has objectively leftwing analysts like Jeff Toobin, who they give authoritative voice to while he pushes a decided leftwing world view. Or consider that CNN casts Chris Cuomo as an objective anchor and he gets a townhall with Nancy Pelosi, but Cuomo's questioning of Republicans and his social media feed reveals him to be a deeply partisan Democrat. Roger Ailes once told me Cuomo had pushed Ailes to let Cuomo replace Allen Colmes against Sean Hannity.

The same happens at major news outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post. The same happens at NPR. The same happens at ABC, CBS, and NBC.

If anything, I think CNN and the Washington Post do a better job than just about anybody trying to recognize their own biases and compensate for them. But they get a lot wrong too.

Getting it wrong has a lot to do with the presuppositions of reporters. Many of them, if not most of them, are coastal liberals who do not understand religion or religious people, do not share the values of people in fly over country, and often hold such values in contempt. That shapes their world view, the presuppositions around which they report, and how and when they pick sides.

The reporting about Israel and Hamas is another example of massive media bias. How the networks chose to cover the opening of the American embassy in Cuba as "historic" and the one in Jerusalem as "controversial" plays into this as well.

Liberal reporters seem more and more willing to belittle and talk down to Trump voters so those voters want to go somewhere that does not treat them with contempt. And then they, like so many of us, want a break from all the non-stop Trump news where every story must be about Trump.

There's more happening in the world than Trump.

As someone who has been pretty critical of the President, I spend my evening on radio reviewing the news of the day. While I am sure some Trump voters have permanently fled, I have mostly kept and grown my audience because they know I may not agree with them on the President, but I share their world view and can relate to them.

Too many reporters these days can not only not relate to their audience, but don't want to. And it shows in how they report the news.

Erick, you say you hold CNN in high regard, but then you rattle off umpteen major flaws with their reporting of news and that they have skewed reports & information. Is that not oxymoronic, when we're looking for truth? How can you hold in high regard, but know that they color their stories to fit their narrative?

1

I was a Fox News junkie until Trump became the Republican nominee for president. It WAS the only news station I watched. But once Fox became the mouthpiece for all things Trump, I stopped watching and haven't turned it on since. Fox News lies as much about Trump as the other news stations did about Obama.

This is part of a larger shift from old media to new media.

Profits are probably down so they lash out at the alternative media who may or may not be as good.

This is an interesting post. Erick knows a lot more about the media from the inside than me, so I listen up. He seems to be saying that there is some good reporting, but also some bias, within the mainstream media. The willful bias is giving an opening to alternatives. Sounds about right from what I can see, but I'm no expert. Look at Shapiro and Levin, for just a couple of examples. They are rocketing.

napleslover said: I was a Fox News junkie until Trump became the Republican nominee for president. It WAS the only news station I watched. But once Fox became the mouthpiece for all things Trump, I stopped watching and haven't turned it on since. Fox News lies as much about Trump as the other news stations did about Obama.

How would you know what FOX News says since you have not watched it since during the campaign?

Since gas light trump is the biggest slanderer, liar, nasty/foul mouthed degenerate in the government, anything he says is fair game to use against him!!! He don't get no benefit of the doubt!!!
Fair is fair>>YE HYPOCRITES!!!!!

Wow, that's really dishonest of Erick E.

If you read the entire, full-context, non-edited quote of Trump's here, you will see that interpreting his comments as applying to all of the immigrants at the Southern border is a perfectly valid interpretation.

Yes, you can staple some rose-colored glasses to your face and imagine he didn't really mean that, but that would be ridiculous. The context here is that this is a president speaking, whose policies are deporting lots of people who are NOT ms-13, so when he says, "we're taking people out of the country" there's only ONE way to interpret this.

THE PRESIDENT: We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals. And we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before. And because of the weak laws, they come in fast, we get them, we release them, we get them again, we bring them out. It’s crazy.

Yes, but the "pro-Trump media alternatives" drip with contempt for the OTHER half of the nation. So how are they any better? Shouldn't they be setting a "Golden Rule" example?

@JASmius They are not. Yes, they should. That isn't what most people want though. Most people just want an amen corner and to watch "news" that affirms their views. The number of people that really want, not claim to want, objective news coverage is very small. If there were a larger demand there, someone would have filled it.

I have often defended Erick here and hold him in high regard. The statement that he holds CNN in high regard just doesn't make any sense. Erick admits that they are filled with bias, not everyone there, but the network as a whole, on virtually every major issue of current affairs. I really don't see how he can hold a network in high regard that claims to be an objective distributor of news, but is in fact mostly just a propaganda arm for the left, which he basically admits.

My speculation is that it comes from his personal relationships with many of the employees from his time as a contributor. If an employee in a news organization is fair, but their views don't get into the final product, the final product has to be judged for what it is. Biased liberal "journalists" can also be nice and friendly people on a personal level. That doesn't make their unadmitted bias any less damaging to our society and to the image of the media.

CNN might be less bias than MSNBC, but MSNBC doesn't really claim to be objective either. They embrace leftism with open arms. At that point, we are just discussing the nutritional value of poop based on its corn content.

1

@etbass -- In the case of all of the news organizations--including Fox News--they have a news organization and they have "shows". When people talk about bias they usually mean the "shows" which is a panel of talking heads discussing the day's news.

Now, there is certainly some degree of bias in the news reporting itself, which is in the timing. Fox News finds it really important to spend a lot of time keeping everybody up to date on the exact movements and statements of Hillary Clinton. CNN will spend more time on what the sitting US president or what his cabinet members said today, or legal issues pertaining to same.

But both organizations generally report the basic news of the day.

Also, you can't take journalists for granted. Reporting on the news of the world is very labor intensive and costs a lot of money. It's no exaggeration that reporters risk their lives every day to bring us news from dangerous places, and many work really hard in any case to bring us more mundane but really important news (say like that e. coli lettuce problem).

I am nowhere near reporters in my life, but I can imagine somebody like Erick, being close to them, would have an appreciation for their work and for the individuals who do it.

@JaneKMiller

I get that. CNN's hard news has a very strong bias. Every issue is framed from a leftist point of view. Some things aren't covered, both sides are not presented and bias invades every aspect of it. The hard news may not be as blatant has the shows, but it is still there.

I find Fox to be less bias in the news, it also less serious. More Entertainment Tonight and less Evening news, even if the underlying bias is less.

That doesn't mean good, unbiased people don't work there. If half the apples are rotten, it quickly ruins the entire barrell. That is CNN. They don't have any counterweight.

We have very few journalist left. We have SJW warriors masquerading as journalists. The death of journalism is not a good thing, but we need to address the world as it is, not as we want it to be.

I think news organizations should sort out relevance by the actual effect on people's daily lives.

CNN et. al. cover the current US president and politicians extensively.

Fox News covers the former US president and a former US presidential candidate extensively.

When fact is seasoned with the salt of opinion it becomes almost impossible to suppress bias. It is the mark of a good; perhaps great journalist, something extremely rare in our present world. The cause, in my opinion, is our very liberal, progressive ideology being taught in our universities and colleges.

Stories