3 ms·
I can't believe that someone can come to the conclusion you just did. The media was overwhelmingly anti-Trump, that shouldn't even be in dispute. He may have
by toss1941 10y ago
I can't believe that someone can come to the conclusion you just did. The media was overwhelmingly anti-Trump, that shouldn't even be in dispute. He may have "won" a few talking points that the media was forced to report on as you indicated, but to say the media was accommodating to Trump is just fantasy.
- chc 10y agoThe people in the media were overwhelmingly anti-Trump, no argument. But the media's coverage of the election was not anti-Trump any more than reporting objective facts in the face of Trump's lies can be called "anti-Trump." They reported on Hillary like any other candidate, but they walked on eggshells around Trump, trying and failing to find a way to report on somebody they despised — and who constantly accused them of conspiring against him — without appearing partial. For example, there were way more stories about the how sketchy the Clinton Foundation was than the Trump Foundation, even though the latter has factually violated the law and the former has not.