knowell, just answer his questions.
At least somebody gives straight answers around here.
knowell, just answer his questions.
At least somebody gives straight answers around here.
Seriously?
Just think about what you wrote. Like him or hate him, you still have to do the news straight or, why bother. Just call the news an opinion piece.
That's what the entire thread is about.
When do you "report the news", and when do you call a dangerous maniac a dangerous maniac instead of "reporting the news"?
Trump is not Hitler, he's not even close. He's just a narcissistic, low self-esteem, businessman, who probably thought running for POTUS would be like every other business endeavor he has ever undertaken.
If you could provide when whatever Trump is becomes something trending towards Hitler/when we will know it, that would be great.
That's the entire basis behind this question and the original post.
I imagine people gathering around their radios in the 30's and early 40's saying "if they could just report what Hitler is doing instead of providing their own take on it then that would be great!!!"
DAMN LIBERAL NAZI BIAS!!!
Well the thread is exploring the relationship between modern politics and the media, which is why the thread is titled "role of the media." You can explore any number of aspects of the election for any reason, but Doofus appears to be seeking discussion/clarity/answers about the role of the media not about "Hillary and her unprecedented level of corruption."
So you are saying the role of the media is to expose Trump as being unfit for president but it's not the role of the media to expose Hillary's corruption? Not sure I follow that "logic".
And the next step for anti-media folks is to complain that media aren't covering how Hillary rigged the election. It's an ugly circle.
Is people not believing the same things you do really a proper justification for the media to just become liberal propaganda?
Is people not believing the same things you do really a proper justification for the media to just become liberal propaganda?
Well they did convene one of their panels to talk about it and did so for an hour or two but the headline on the bottom was constantly there so if you weren't paying attention or were walking by and glanced at the tv then that was all you would get from it.
The two Trump supporters on the panel just kept saying voter fraud is a major issue and that it happens in inner cities at an alarmingly high rate. The result of this narrative being put out there (by Trump and the media) is seen in a recent poll where 50%+ of Republicans now believe that voter fraud is a "major issue" when that's not the reality in the least.
I suppose this question would have seemed more sincere had you asked it about Hillary and her unprecedented level of corruption.
Has the media not covered her "unprecedented level of corruption"?
I believe the media should cover all angles of all candidates. Where have I stated otherwise?
If you wanted to use the standard you brought up, they would editorialize that Hillary is too corrupt to be president or to just state what she says at face value.