8 ms·

Yep. Been following the coverage since the primaries and though I don't know who I would have voted for, seeing the self righteous intelligentia being so blata

Yep. Been following the coverage since the primaries and though I don't know who I would have voted for, seeing the self righteous intelligentia being so blatantly wrong on the election outcome gives me an embarrassing satisfaction. None of the established media did even try to keep a disguise of neutrality. Not in the US, not the BBC or here in Germany. You can be against Trump all you want, but where has "journalistic standards" been gone? If your whole organization is made up of individuals who see themselves as morally-superior while being a Clinton-biased - how realistic is it that this organization is able to get a realistic glimpse at the outside world?

sdegutis 10y ago
The media is entirely biased towards moral liberalism and I thought it was an "open secret" that only the most self-deluded didn't know about. Of course they're going to be biased towards Clinton, she's the morally liberal candidate. That's their job. If they don't go along with it, surely they get fired. They provide an avenue for confirmation bias, which is interesting because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, considering most people are liberal because of the strong influence of the (biased) media on them.
- pedalpete 10y ago
  I believe Fox is the most watched news channel and Fox is the 2nd most popular network behind CBS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_television_networks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_television_networks So not all media is as liberal as you say. The sad bit is that the source of media is so partisan that we only listen to what we want to hear (that goes both to the right and to the left).
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - kristopolous 10y ago
    I think it's disingenuous to characterize a political stance of a continuation on policy as "liberal". That's what "conservative" means by any dictionary out there. These terms have become utterly useless.
    - pedalpete 10y ago
      Can you expand on this? I'm not grasping what you're saying but am curious.
      - kristopolous 10y ago
        if conservative means "don't change things" and liberal means "try new things" then an establishment candidate which espouses to not change things would be "conservative" while a candidate that wants to do dramatically different and new things would be "liberal". So what are we left it?
  - TheGirondin 10y ago
    Fox News Channel is the the one right-wing media outlet in a sea of left-wing TV, print, and internet outlets. The actual Fox channel is not very aligned with FNC - FFS they give Seth McFarlane 2 hours of primetime every Sunday night.
- kristopolous 10y ago
  What do you mean by moral liberalism? Can you concretely define it?
  - skrebbel 10y ago
    My guess: "not economic liberalism". The word liberalism has many meanings in different places. Eg in many European countries, it's considered to be mostly an economic stance, as in "not socialism". In the US, however, the word has a second meaning, which is more about abortion and civil rights and all that than it is about money. I suspect that the GP meant that definition of liberalism by "moral liberalism".
- ant6n 10y ago
  Well you know, reality has a well known liberal bias.
cJ0th 10y ago
spot on! In the end I (a German) was watching Fox News! Can you believe it? I know they have their own bias but this one time they were doing a somewhat better job.
- johncolanduoni 10y ago
  I think it was an accident because they were split between loving Trump and wanting him to die in a fire. I don't see any path towards true journalistic standards for any major networks.
  - cJ0th 10y ago
    yeah, probably. But this split is what a good media company needs at any point in time on any issue. Otherwise it's just one-sided drivel.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    Yep, that was the secret sauce. They had reporters, viewers, executives that were one both sides of the issue. So one this one thing it wound up..."fair and balanced". Anytime a bunch of like-minded people reports on something, you'll wind up with a sideways story.
- woodpanel 10y ago
  So true. The "feud" with Megan Kelly made her probably the most trustworthy person on TV this season. Wether FOX's motivation was election-fallout prepping or wether it was an organic change that brought things like the Ailes ousting, they were the most "fair and balanced".
johncolanduoni 10y ago
I'll give the foreign media a pass since Trump was doing a lot of finger pointing at foreign countries and their citizens. The domestic media on the other hand...
- woodpanel 10y ago
  True. The outburst of self-shaming should be humongous for US domestic media. Whats interesting though when you mention the difference between foreign and domestic ignorance: the intelligentia has a more international mindset and keeps to export and confirm ones bias across borders as the individuals wish. For example, I keep getting baffled by US speakers at EU dev cons, as they sprinkle or finish their talks with their domestic political stances. For example finishing their talk about their dev ops set up out the blue with: "heres a chat room I've opened up for all the LGBT devs here that feel discriminated against". Not only not an issue in most of EU countries but certainly non-existing at the specific con. Very wierd. The other time I remember one speaker twittering about the blatant racism of a German airline in their safety instruction videos. He managed to be ignorant not only of the context, or of the reference to a beloved German novel (Karl May's "Winnetou") but the whole concept of decency (in that, that you may not get the whole picture if you enter another culture so don't rush to your culture's conclusions). If he had invested the same amount in understanding context as he had in extruding anger, he might have even understood that the "Winnetou" stories are anything but derogatory towards native americans.
rdtsc 10y ago
I will always remember the media in this campaign. CNN's quote of "Also interesting is remember, it’s illegal to possess, ah, the stolen documents — it’s different for the media" really typifies the type of standards the media has lowered itself to. How could nobody see that ignorance and stupidity on that level was not helping them... It is like they took a gun, paid a lot of money for it, and then used it to shot themselves in the foot.
byuu 10y ago
The media wanted a razor-tight race because it was great for their ratings, so they gave Trump billions in free advertising on the 24-hour news cycle. And they got their wish: 48% to 48% of the popular vote.
- woodpanel 10y ago
  Yes, of course they do profit from escalating every piece of information. But in terms of "tightness" it was a different picture: almost every poll saw Clinton decisivly winning. There was active speculation about how huge the republican wound-licking would be because of the gigantic margins by which Clinton should have won.

sdegutis 10y ago

The media is entirely biased towards moral liberalism and I thought it was an "open secret" that only the most self-deluded didn't know about. Of course they're going to be biased towards Clinton, she's the morally liberal candidate. That's their job. If they don't go along with it, surely they get fired. They provide an avenue for confirmation bias, which is interesting because it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, considering most people are liberal because of the strong influence of the (biased) media on them.

pedalpete 10y ago
I believe Fox is the most watched news channel and Fox is the 2nd most popular network behind CBS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_television_networks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Three_television_networks So not all media is as liberal as you say. The sad bit is that the source of media is so partisan that we only listen to what we want to hear (that goes both to the right and to the left).
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- kristopolous 10y ago
  I think it's disingenuous to characterize a political stance of a continuation on policy as "liberal". That's what "conservative" means by any dictionary out there. These terms have become utterly useless.
  - pedalpete 10y ago
    Can you expand on this? I'm not grasping what you're saying but am curious.
    - kristopolous 10y ago
      if conservative means "don't change things" and liberal means "try new things" then an establishment candidate which espouses to not change things would be "conservative" while a candidate that wants to do dramatically different and new things would be "liberal". So what are we left it?
- TheGirondin 10y ago
  Fox News Channel is the the one right-wing media outlet in a sea of left-wing TV, print, and internet outlets. The actual Fox channel is not very aligned with FNC - FFS they give Seth McFarlane 2 hours of primetime every Sunday night.
kristopolous 10y ago
What do you mean by moral liberalism? Can you concretely define it?
- skrebbel 10y ago
  My guess: "not economic liberalism". The word liberalism has many meanings in different places. Eg in many European countries, it's considered to be mostly an economic stance, as in "not socialism". In the US, however, the word has a second meaning, which is more about abortion and civil rights and all that than it is about money. I suspect that the GP meant that definition of liberalism by "moral liberalism".
ant6n 10y ago
Well you know, reality has a well known liberal bias.

cJ0th 10y ago

spot on! In the end I (a German) was watching Fox News! Can you believe it? I know they have their own bias but this one time they were doing a somewhat better job.

johncolanduoni 10y ago
I think it was an accident because they were split between loving Trump and wanting him to die in a fire. I don't see any path towards true journalistic standards for any major networks.
- cJ0th 10y ago
  yeah, probably. But this split is what a good media company needs at any point in time on any issue. Otherwise it's just one-sided drivel.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  Yep, that was the secret sauce. They had reporters, viewers, executives that were one both sides of the issue. So one this one thing it wound up..."fair and balanced". Anytime a bunch of like-minded people reports on something, you'll wind up with a sideways story.
woodpanel 10y ago
So true. The "feud" with Megan Kelly made her probably the most trustworthy person on TV this season. Wether FOX's motivation was election-fallout prepping or wether it was an organic change that brought things like the Ailes ousting, they were the most "fair and balanced".

johncolanduoni 10y ago

I'll give the foreign media a pass since Trump was doing a lot of finger pointing at foreign countries and their citizens. The domestic media on the other hand...

woodpanel 10y ago
True. The outburst of self-shaming should be humongous for US domestic media. Whats interesting though when you mention the difference between foreign and domestic ignorance: the intelligentia has a more international mindset and keeps to export and confirm ones bias across borders as the individuals wish. For example, I keep getting baffled by US speakers at EU dev cons, as they sprinkle or finish their talks with their domestic political stances. For example finishing their talk about their dev ops set up out the blue with: "heres a chat room I've opened up for all the LGBT devs here that feel discriminated against". Not only not an issue in most of EU countries but certainly non-existing at the specific con. Very wierd. The other time I remember one speaker twittering about the blatant racism of a German airline in their safety instruction videos. He managed to be ignorant not only of the context, or of the reference to a beloved German novel (Karl May's "Winnetou") but the whole concept of decency (in that, that you may not get the whole picture if you enter another culture so don't rush to your culture's conclusions). If he had invested the same amount in understanding context as he had in extruding anger, he might have even understood that the "Winnetou" stories are anything but derogatory towards native americans.

rdtsc 10y ago

I will always remember the media in this campaign. CNN's quote of "Also interesting is remember, it’s illegal to possess, ah, the stolen documents — it’s different for the media" really typifies the type of standards the media has lowered itself to. How could nobody see that ignorance and stupidity on that level was not helping them... It is like they took a gun, paid a lot of money for it, and then used it to shot themselves in the foot.

byuu 10y ago

The media wanted a razor-tight race because it was great for their ratings, so they gave Trump billions in free advertising on the 24-hour news cycle. And they got their wish: 48% to 48% of the popular vote.

woodpanel 10y ago
Yes, of course they do profit from escalating every piece of information. But in terms of "tightness" it was a different picture: almost every poll saw Clinton decisivly winning. There was active speculation about how huge the republican wound-licking would be because of the gigantic margins by which Clinton should have won.