patrick.net

Resistance, and opposition, unfortunately is now aligned with reality. That's because the Trump administration is "gaslighting".

Dan8267 says

The media should act as the fourth estate holding all politicians accountable. Instead, they give their team and specific players they like a free pass.

That more cozy relationship is dying. The Whitehouse press briefing room is soon going to be staffed by interns and novice reporters. It's not worth being in that room. There is no cordial ritual of any worth left. The media is pining from the loss, but will refocus.

When the Trump administration content is typically more lie than truth, as a consistent rule, reporting on the truth itself will look like negative bias. A true bias would be a news organization that is covering the lies over or "giving equal time" to the false representations being presented. That would just be an extension of the propaganda itself.

Any news outlet clinging to access will never have any pretense of impartiality. Forget being in the room, or listening to anything coming out of the Trump administration raw and "live". We need the media to take what is being said now, fact check it three times over, and then push it back out into the public with that framing around it. That's always been their job, anyway.

It's what the good organizations are actually doing already. You will have a good idea of which organizations those are when the Trump administration denounces them, or the Trumpets whine about them online.

Fact Checking is really just twisting to support a narrative.

Rew says

When the Trump administration content is typically more lie than truth, as a consistent rule, reporting on the truth itself will look like negative bias. A true bias would be a news organization that is covering the lies over or "giving equal time" to the false representations being presented. That would just be an extension of the propaganda itself.

That means that when the Media mentions Yemenis being banned from entry for a few weeks, they should also mention that it was US policy starting under Obama to assist the Saudis in bombing it, and it appears sending Special Forces and apparently bombing ourselves. And Libya, and Syria.

Remember: Banning people from entry for a few months is horrible, a lot worse than just dropping 1000s of bombs on their country.

What we really need is Mandatory Context and Half-Truth Prevention like when CNN selectively edited that Sister of the Guy the Black Cop shot to make it look like she called for peace when she was really telling the crowd to Burn and Loot not here in the "hood", but in the White Neighborhood.

For example, media allegations of "Anti-LGBTQ" need to be presented with factual reasons for such a belief. Things that happened, IE "in December 2005 at a Press Conference, Trump said "I hate the gays". Rather than media simply remarking that he's Anti-Gay or the more weasely "thought to be gay", since when the MSM talks about the Apollo Moon Landings, the MSM never says "reminding the audience that many people think NASA faked"

T L Lipsovich says

Fact Checking is really just twisting to support a narrative.

That's false. Simply stating that a report shows no widespread evidence of voter fraud, or a crowd size was not as large as the past, isn't spinning anything. Challenging someone making statements which are false, isn't spinning anything either. It's not butt-hurt. It's not an "agenda". It's simply seeking to represent what is true and actual.

Rew says

That's false. Simply stating that a report shows no widespread evidence of voter fraud, or a crowd size was not as large as the past, isn't spinning anything. Challenging someone making statements which are false, isn't spinning anything either. It's not butt-hurt. It's not an "agenda". It's simply seeking to represent what is true and actual.

Not at all. Analyzing what politicians say and do is largely a matter of opinion. Polifact for one stretches it in favor of Democrats and yet is very narrow and specific when Trump makes claims. A good example is Bernie ("Mostly True") and Trump ("Mostly False") extrapolating numbers for Black Youth Unemployment using pretty much the same method and coming within a few % points of each other.

T L Lipsovich says

Analyzing what politicians say and do is largely a matter of opinion.

Checking a claim, someone's statement presented as fact, is not an exercise in analysis. There are facts and 'alternative facts' (aka: falsehoods). Agreed?

If you claim everything is relative by perspective, than fact is dead across the planet. That's not a position I hold.
What you call "analysis" I might refer to as opinion-news-u-tainment. Many news outlets are in the grips of that, as it caters to a 'buying audience'.

Rew says

Checking a claim, someone's statement presented as fact, is not an exercise in analysis. There are facts and 'alternative facts' (aka: falsehoods). Agreed?

No, because what politicians do and say are often up for interpretation.

Or do they? As the Wall Street Journal's James Taranto has consistently reported, the fact checking business often – too often for anyone's good – turns on matters of opinion rather than matters of "fact." One recent example that drives the point home is the Washington Post's recent fact check that gave President Barack Obama "four Pinocchios" for asserting that he had, in fact, called what happened in Benghazi an act of "terrorism."

According to the Post's Glenn Kessler, Obama did in fact refer to it the next day in a Rose Garden address as an "act of terror," but did not call it "terrorism." Is this a distinction without a difference? Hardly, at least as far as former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney might be concerned. It will be a long time before anyone forgets how the second presidential debate turned into a tag team match with Obama and CNN's Candy Crowley both explaining to the mystified Republican that Romney was, in fact, wrong when he accused the president of not having called the Benghazi attack a terrorist incident.

So is "act of terror" the same as "terrorism" or not? It all depends on whether you think the two are different or the same.

If Trump builds a Border Wall and institutes a Tariff on some Mexican Products or a Special Payroll Deduction from Guest Workers, did he get Mexico Pay for the Wall or Not? If Mexico never actually just handed cash over specifically for the wall?

T L Lipsovich says

If Trump builds a Border Wall and institutes a Tariff on some Mexican Products

If the tariffs result in higher prices for american consumers (and they will), then we can say not only that american citizens will pay for the wall, but that they also got grubered...

MMR says

How come you don't support H1-b positions for math and science teachers; many schools, especially in low income areas lack this.

Who says I don't ? My school hired 3 of these (in Math and physics) the same year I started. LA was aggressively hiring back then. As far as I know it's still done and not fought by our LA union. Language and cultural issues can make it tough for foreign teachers, but I have no problem with it.

This doesn't impact teacher salaries becasue there aren't enough coming here to teach and becasue teacher salaries are already pretty low (not high anyway). They top out well under 100K and that's after many years. A software engineer can get up into the 6 figures in just a few years if they're good. So the risk to software engineers is way different. IF I were in that business, I would object to dishonest practices designed to bring more foriegn programmers in. THen again, I can see the other side too sometimes. If someone comes here to study engineering from say China, at UCLA, and wants to stay, I totally think they shouldbbe able to get an H1-B vise to work here.

Keeping foriegn talent here has it's advantages. Even relative to the gene pool.

So much of politics is subjective and prone to interpretation ad nauseum. When the media use this pervasive gray area to spin whole lies out of true cloth to advance a not-so-hidden agenda, they become the enemy of truth and the people.

#PressOn trending hard today.

T L Lipsovich says

If Trump builds a Border Wall and institutes a Tariff on some Mexican Products or a Special Payroll Deduction from Guest Workers, did he get Mexico Pay for the Wall or Not? If Mexico never actually just handed cash over specifically for the wall?

I think economists could pretty clearly trace net costs of the above to being very lopsided: the American consumer and tax payer would pay.

But currently, America is paying for the wall already, and not just in proposed spending.

T L Lipsovich says

No, because what politicians do and say are often up for interpretation.

Where there is room for interpretation, you can interpret, but ...

Is it raining? Are you wet?
Did the report show enhanced interrogation to be effective?
Was the crowd estimate the largest ever?

These are not interpretable. These are finite and bound.

I wonder how friendly the globalist oligarchy mouthpiece (the MSM) would have been to Bernie if he won?

I think he would get the Trump Treatment he actually wanted to reign in the 1%, tax the rich, go after bankers. Trump never said any of that he wants lower taxes and look at how they crucify Trump.

Obviously we have never had a real president before 1/20/17 that was not owned by the corporations, and they are going after him to get back the power of the POTUS so they can do whatever they want. They went too far though - look at Libya (failed state now), they funded ISIS in Syria, I have no idea what Yemen is. Its crazy how no one was in charge under Obama, all he did was talk pretty, while droning people for bribes to his and hillarys secret offshore accounts. Thats where we were.

Hillary took money from the Saudis to do regime change. We would be so fucked with her as president. Basically would be president Tony Soprano.

Every day I've checked the news on Google for Donald Trump. And every day it's a non-stop slew of negative articles, full of emotional manipulation, conjecture, and false narratives. Even before Donald Trump's first day in office.

It's beyond obvious the mainstream media is centrally controlled. That being said, the average moron has no memory, or ability to think beyond what they Google that week. They can't see the "big picture". So they believe their non-stop lies or capitulate to them.

I don't see Donald Trump getting elected for another 4 years because of this. That means he has an impossible time frame to get this perfect. Or their agenda will simply continue after he leaves office.

I wonder if they're going to wait it out.. or something else.

dublin hillz says

T L Lipsovich says

If Trump builds a Border Wall and institutes a Tariff on some Mexican Products

If the tariffs result in higher prices for american consumers (and they will), then we can say not only that american citizens will pay for the wall, but that they also got grubered...

A tariff is a "consumption tax". This allows the consumer to choose weather to purchase. Tariffs funded the entire U.S. government until 1913. This was during eras where most commodities were produced locally, or manufactured in the USA. "Importing" was synonymous with "luxury" for consumer products, since it was cheaper to buy locally. Also certain things could not be sourced from the United States or were better deals - even with the high tariffs prior to 1913 (which were typically between 20% and 45%) international trade was still a bargain.

As a 2D example: A shirt from China costs $10.00. It retails for $50.00. With a 20% tariff you're now retailing at $52.00. It's not as a high price on the individual as the media constantly leads people to believe. It can also result in certain products being produced locally. And sometimes, another positive effect can occur: foreign exporters building factories in the USA to avoid a tariff. This is what happened in the 1980's under Ronald Regan.

@ Ironman

But the average moron doesn't care. They just hypnotically watch the media. Whatever it says, they believe.

rando says

@marcus I can't believe you are just flinging the same old accusations without listening at all.

rando says

Great quote by Steve Bannon, sorry I didn't run across it till now:

“I want you to quote this,” Mr. Bannon added. “The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/26/business/media/stephen-bannon-trump-news-media.html

I think he's right. It was never Hillary vs Trump, it was the Media vs Trump.

Okay, well if I misinterpreted it was only that you like him. MAybe you don't even like what he's saying.

But you clearly think he's (Bannon) right. I say that's so wrong and that only someone such as yourself that has a very different ideas about Islam and a very different view about minorities (than I) would possibly think that. I can't see it at all. Not even slightly. And I have been listening to you over the years and I understand your point of view.

Having said that, I'll add that I get it about identity politics and and the fact that democrats need to address the issues that affect everyone, and back off when it comes to issues such as transgender issues.

But as for the media versus Trump ? Give me a break !! HE would not have been elected if

1) THe media hadn't given him so much attention for acting like such a douchebag (a reputation he will never undo with over 50% of the public).

2) IF they had called him out properly for his constant dishonesty.

Patrick, I have to assume that even you don't appreciate how high a percentage of what TRump says is pure lies. Trump lies more than 4 times as much as any politician we've ever seen. The media was not at war with him. THey gave him a fucking pass. One has to like certain policies of his an awful lot, to be willing to overlook that, or how much of an idiot he is.

Michael Cooke says

As a 2D example: A shirt from China costs $10.00. It retails for $50.00.

I worked in the garment industry a long time. I've never seen anything remotely close to a 500% markup. How do I get in on this?

dublin hillz says

If the tariffs result in higher prices for american consumers (and they will), then we can say not only that american citizens will pay for the wall, but that they also got grubered...

Or the companies will move back to the US.

We already have evidence: Why South America was backward. They pursued Free Trade from the Get Go. We did not. So instead of British Goods, we made our Own - and became the World Economic Superpower. Now, we have rising inequality, a lack of basic lower middle class jobs, and we don't need more Education. There aren't 7 Million Accounting and Engineering jobs going unfilled. Anybody who believes that is smoking some fantastic weed. If there were, they'd be making $150k/yr to start right after college even if we had 500,000 H1-Bs/year.

Also, imported goods do not relieve the strain on Housing, medical, and education costs... which continue to rise while wages stagnate. However, added value manufacturing does.

The rise of inequality and the destruction of the Heartland and White Working Class is directly related to the shift of "High Wages Good! Making it in America Good!" to "Low Wages are Great! Make it Abroad!" mentality.

rando says

I think the press was really the tipping point, the thing that pushed enough people over to Trump's side for him to win.

THe press literally did only one one thousandth the job they should have done, informing the public about Trump. This is becasue they operate under the assumption that a close election is good for business. And they worry too much about bias and acusations that they are too far left, in a country that has swung so too far to the right that it's ridiculous.

To the media, the election is entertainment, and it's only interesting if it's close. They intentionally let it get too close, thinking the idiot could never win, instead of properaly educating Americans about their choice.

Honestly I don't even see the difference in the Press before and after the election, except they're more openly opposed.

Trump is a Class Threat to them, which they reinterpret through their filters as White Racism. Van Jones, great example.

What we're actually seeing is this:

The Mainstream Press is losing it's power, and every day they try to Shame and Blame the Administration into firing somebody or backing down, to do anything Reactive, in an attempt to convince themselves they aren't the #LegacyMedia.

Newspapers were declining for a while, but now it's TV and Cable News' turn.

marcus says

To the media, the election is It's entertainment, and it's only interesting if it's close. They intentionally let it get too close, thinking the idiot could never win.

If so, why is the bashing only one way? It most certainly is and was not. They did not go after Hillary for hits.

Remember when she collapsed at the 9/11 memorial after the media and her campaign spent the past few weeks before lecturing everybody about what great shape she was in? And then they attempted to dismiss it as dehydration... before admitting it was pneumonia.

Truly the Power of Kek is with Trump.

The reason the media can't bash Hillary to the degree of salaciousness they bash Trump, is they don't even know how to do it because she is their kind of person. It's like expecting a Very Religious Person to bash their Super Fundy Priest to the same degree Bill Maher would bash him. Or asking a WGTOW lesbian fanatic feminist to bash Andrea Dworkin the same way she would bash John Wayne or some other masculine figure.

T L Lipsovich says

Trump is a Class Threat to them

What is that supposed to mean?

T L Lipsovich says

The reason the media can't bash Hillary to the degree of salaciousness they bash Trump, is they don't even know how to do it because she is their kind of person.

Or simply that Trump's inadequacies are rather more glaring.

Rashomon says

What is that supposed to mean?

The Professional Class has always been against the Working Class. Sometimes they cover up by "picking and choosing" some poor people to hold up over others, while condemning another group as unfairly besieged.

They used to do this with the former English Poor Commoners a victim of the times and "high farming" vs. the Papist Superstitious Dissolute SubhumanIrish.
Or with the dumb Blacks who can be violent and animalistic at times vs. the hardy Pioneer, hardscrabble and rude but a tough fighter.
Today it's the evil White racist, sexist, misogynist deplorable methheads from the Heartland vs. the poor Oppressed Brown people just trying to better themselves.

And what, you think Trump is standing up for the working class??

Rashomon says

And what, you think Trump is standing up for the working class??

He certainly didn't win by the Urban Professional Class vote.

T L Lipsovich says

If so, why is the bashing only one way?

Really ? The bashing of HIllary was pretty constant. But people in Russia and the FBI clearly didn't think it was shrill enough.

I'm not saying that as much time was spent bashing Hillary as Trump. But then we're comparing a career government person with a pretty extensive govt positive record to go along with some serious negatives (I'm talking the legit ones - which is a small fraction of what the right wing machine would say about her murders, BEnghazi and on and on. But the emial questions were legit).

Sometimes, one candidate really is WAY WAY worse than the other. The bashing of Trump should have been much stronger. Did he even really deep down want to win ? Other than for what it does for his ego ?

Rashomon says

Or simply that Trump's inadequacies are rather more glaring.

Or that the Press commits their great Bias Sin of Omission.

The Press can't control the narrative any more. Their Unmentioned Facts are a mouseclick away, they're no longer a trip to the Library's Microfiche Records trying to find that article in that foreign newspaper you once read that claimed the opposite...

T L Lipsovich says

He certainly didn't win by the Urban Professional Class vote.

He won by pandering to baser instincts. He isn't a bloody champion of the working class FFS.

Rashomon says

He won by pandering to baser instincts. He isn't a bloody champion of the working class FFS.

Politfact: "Mostly True"

T L Lipsovich says

Or that the Press commits their great Bias Sin of Omission.

The Press can't control the narrative any more.

Yeah, because Trump is whiter than white and offers them nothing to question. Oh, hang on...

Rashomon says

you think Trump is standing up for the working class

He figured out how to get their vote, in a way that makes me embarrassed to be an American.

That's all.

Rashomon says

Yeah, because Trump is whiter than white and offers them nothing to question. Oh, hang on...

Evil White Meathead Racist Sexist Deplorable. Not Educated, Urbane, Cosmopolitan who understands the harmful role of Toxic Masculinity and White Privilege.

T L Lipsovich says

Evil White Meathead Racist Sexist Deplorable. Not Educated, Urbane, Cosmopolitan who understands the role of Patriarchy.

Yawn. He's been a shit bag for a very long time. To pretend otherwise is just you falling in line with the alternative facts narrative.

www.youtube.com/embed/Pa-7a2gLDjI

Rashomon says

Yawn. He's been a shit bag for a very long time. To pretend otherwise is just you falling in line with the alternative facts narrative.

It's pure coincidence that the Coastal Elites who hate the White Working Class are Anti-Tariff and Pro-Outsourcing.

Yawn again. You and others on here are getting a little too high on your alt-right gibberish.

I love bouregois denying their Class Interests.

There is no Class Conflict, Smedley, I mean Frederica my Au Pair, You Tell Them!!