Former NY Times editor rips Trump coverage as biased

[zimmer]

Ahem, her "years at the Times" were three, to be exact. Jill Abramson was fired by the Times in 2014. She couldn't possibly have a grudge with the paper, could she?.

Perhaps.

But she might want to distance herself from the current insanity. Again, she wasn’t any better, being the Obama ball licker she was.

 

[zimmer]

Well clearly you weren't.

ROTFLOL... Bazinga!!!

 

[trouble13]

I am new here. Do they allow personal attacks?

No it's against the tos

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[MTAtech]

Perhaps.

But she might want to distance herself from the current insanity. Again, she wasn’t any better, being the Obama ball licker she was.

i have no idea what you are writing about (and I don't think you do either.) The Times does one of the best jobs at reporting facts about current events. The fact Trump ordinarily is portrayed negatively is because his actions are generally negative. There is no way to positively report Individual-1's constant lies, falsehoods and untruths. There is no way to portray degradation of the environment or the corruption positively.

Moreover, the Times was not shy to be critical of Obama, regardless of what you wrote.

 

[DaveFagan]

Nothing suprising in this but good to see a former editor for them come out and admit it.

There really needs to be a congressional investigtion into the media and how it operates against America....spinning, lying, and covering up the truth.

Our msm is lilttle more than a huge propaganda operation. Gobbels would really admire them.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-n-y-times-editor-rips-trump-coverage-as-biased

The larger MSM has become a tool of the NeoCons, Deep State, MIC, and Intelligence Agencies. That would follow a Goebbel's plan exactly. Gee, we're way too smart to be snookered by a little mind massage, eh? Media is not Liberal/Conservative biased, it follows the money, as in "cherche la femme," cherche le dollar."
/

 

[ecofarm]

The larger MSM has become a tool of the NeoCons, Deep State, MIC, and Intelligence Agencies.

Aren't the neocons and MIC against the Deep State and Intel Agencies?

 

[DaveFagan]

Aren't the neocons and MIC against the Deep State and Intel Agencies?

Absolutely not! Use your head. Pay attention to who benefits from distortions in the MSM. That would be SOP. Who butters who's bread? The Intelligence Agencies are reported like Gods, the MIC is promoted as necessary, the Deep Stste benefits from MIC funding, and the NeoCons are behind the PNAC Worldview politcy (unilateralism) that needs MIC and Intelligence Agencies. They're all holding hands.
/

 

[ecofarm]

Absolutely not! Use your head. Pay attention to who benefits from distortions in the MSM. That would be SOP. Who butters who's bread? The Intelligence Agencies are reported like Gods, the MIC is promoted as necessary, the Deep Stste benefits from MIC funding, and the NeoCons are behind the PNAC Worldview politcy (unilateralism) that needs MIC and Intelligence Agencies. They're all holding hands.
/

Okay, that makes sense.

 

[Rickeroo]

Nothing suprising in this but good to see a former editor for them come out and admit it.

There really needs to be a congressional investigtion into the media and how it operates against America....spinning, lying, and covering up the truth.

Our msm is lilttle more than a huge propaganda operation. Gobbels would really admire them.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-n-y-times-editor-rips-trump-coverage-as-biased

I agree. I think media bias, when slanted towards or away from a political party, needs to be defined as propaganda. The nature of this propaganda should be taught in sociology classes.

 

[Mr Person]

As can be expected in threads like this,


NEW YORK — Jill Abramson, the former editor of The New York Times, said Thursday that Fox News took her criticism of the newspaper’s Trump coverage in her upcoming book “totally out of context” for a story that appeared this week. The Fox story, headlined “Former NY Times editor rips Trump coverage as biased,” quotes from Abramson’s book, “Merchants of Truth.” She wrote that although current Times executive editor Dean Baquet publicly said he didn’t want the newspaper to be the opposition party, “his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump.” With a mostly liberal audience, “there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative,” she wrote in the book.

Abramson was executive editor of the Times from 2011 to 2014 before being fired following a dispute with Baquet, one of her deputies. She said in an email interview with The Associated Press that the Fox article’s author, “Media Buzz” host Howard Kurtz, had ignored compliments that she had for the Times and The Washington Post. “His article is an attempt to Foxify my book, which is full of praise for The Times and The Washington Post and their coverage of Trump,” she wrote in the email.. . . Abramson said Kurtz never called her for comment before writing his story.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/ente...f878a26288a_story.html?utm_term=.43d1018cd33a




There's a reason Fox likes to go on about "Fake News", and it's the same reason the strong majority of DP's conservatives constantly attack liberals. It has to do with a psychological term called "projection."

 

[SmartCat]

I am new here. Do they allow personal attacks?

Personal attacks are discouraged. That may be the reason you were banned.

 

[SmartCat]

The bias is the reason for the investigations. Are you one of those that has to have everything explained?

Trump is known to have refused to pay contractors and vendors what he promised to pay them. He has bragged about sexually abusing women. i am confident that the investigations will uncover some really grisley scandals. I wait with joyful anticipation.

 

[SmartCat]

Did anyone say congress should launch a criminal investigation? The need is for congress to expose the reality of fake news and a biased media....of course many have woken up to that....but far too many are still deluded and continue to watch cnn

"Fake news" is Trump's term for facts that are unflattering to him.

"Alternative facts" is White House press secretary Sarah Sanders' term for Trump's lies.

 

[SmartCat]

The main stream leftist liberal media has become the propagandist outlet for leftist communist seditious anarchist atheist demon devils.

The further to the right one is, the further to the left sensible people look.

 

[SmartCat]

The first thing populist authoritarian governments have tried to do through out history is discredit, censure, control, even obliterate all media and bend what is left to the governments will. What is happening in the United States is not new, it has been repeated over and over again. Trump came to power through a fear based populist agenda and has very definite authoritarian tendencies. While he was still just a candidate he said he wanted to open up the nations libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations and win lots of money. I don't doubt that there is bias because reporters are humans with their own political ideas. That has been true since the beginning of news. A free press is the foundation of Democracy. No news organization is perfect nor should we expect it to be, when an error is discovered honorable organizations apologize. All news reporting that is not favorable is not fake news. We can all agree that Trump is not a normal President. The sheer magnitude of quotes, tweets, and actions by this President are exhausting but must be reported. All Americans should be alarmed with concerted attacks by any president on a free press. The press has to be there intact and healthy regardless of who the President is. Trump has been successful in selling his vendetta against all unfavorable news as biased, resistance reporting. A lot of it is just reporting. Trump supporters call it biased. The reality is that Trump is a cash cow to news companies. They are going to report on every action he takes and everything he has to say. Jimmy Carter also said that the press was too hard on Trump but he didn't use the word biased. I don't doubt that what Jill Abramson said has truth in it. Bias is not necessarily unfair if the reporting is true, factual, and unspun. I think most of it is true, factual, and unspun.

Newspapers and broadcasting stations demonstrate their bias by choosing which facts to report and which facts to ignore. This is legitimate. What is not legitimate is the way Trump lies, and the way Rush Limbaugh has lied since at least 1994.