4 ms·

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by bias against Trump? The media is very critical but I would say that 99% of it is fully deserved. What would you p

Could you please elaborate on what you mean by bias against Trump? The media is very critical but I would say that 99% of it is fully deserved. What would you perceive as unbiased reporting in this context? Edit: Downvotes instead of responses? Very classy.

OJFord 10y ago
There have been things just outright made up, 'gone viral', and reported on by organs that clearly didn't conduct even the most rudimentary of fact-checking.
- tmalsburg2 10y ago
  That may be true but it doesn't justify blanket statements about the media being generally biased specifically against Trump. First, untrue things have also been reported about other candidates. Second, the majority of things reported about Trump seem to be correct.
  - pessimizer 10y ago
    The majority of things reported about Trump are based on a single sentence he tweeted a year ago, the opinion of a random expert, or anonymous leaks, all surrounded by 5000 words of editorial. The current question being struggled over by the news media is about whether he is mentally ill, as you can tell by going to http://news.google.com http://news.google.com and searching for "mentally ill" (not "Trump mentally ill" just "mentally ill.") They've determined that he's not, although they've found half a dozen psychiatrists and experts who either say that he is, or that they can't say whether he is or isn't due to professional standards, or say that he suffers from a personality disorder, and that the Trump debate should move on to whether personality disorders are actually mental illness, or another class of disturbance. Nevertheless, it might be a positive step to install a psychiatrist to continually evaluate the president in order to remove from power if he shows signs of the illness of narcissism. So what they're reporting is probably true; Donald Trump is probably not mentally ill, and it's probably not appropriate for psychiatrists to say that he is. Why they needed 50 billion articles about it in the last 5 days? Probably just being thorough about it. Is it Time to Call Trump Mentally Ill? (Answer: No. But stay tuned for the follow-up, Is It Time To Call Trump a Pedophile Who Beats His Wife?) https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/opinion/is-it-time-to-call-trump-mentally-ill.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/opinion/is-it-time-to-cal... President Trump is a 'world class narcissist,' but he's not mentally ill, says the psychiatrist who helped define narcissism http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-abcarian-trump-psychiatrist-20170219-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-abcarian-trump-p... Psychologist Asks Colleagues To Sign Petition For Trump's Removal http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/02/19/psychologist-calls-on-colleagues-to-sign-petition-for-trumps-removal/#4142eab14971 http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/02/19/psych... Trump's mental health debate: What is it about? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38991171 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38991171 Donald Trump Isn’t Mentally Ill. He’s Just Unpleasant, Psychiatrist Says http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/donald-trump-isn-t-mentally-ill-he-s-just-unpleasant-n721766 http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/donald-trump-isn-t... Democrats raise questions about Trump’s mental health http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320018-democrats-raise-questions-about-trumps-mental-health http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320018-democrats-raise-que... A Medical Theory for Donald Trump’s Bizarre Behavior (Subtitle: Many mental health professionals believe the president is ill. But what if the cause is an untreated STD?) https://newrepublic.com/article/140702/medical-theory-donald-trumps-bizarre-behavior https://newrepublic.com/article/140702/medical-theory-donald... Psychiatrists Debate Weighing in on Trump's Mental Health https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychiatrists-debate-weighing-in-on-trumps-mental-health/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychiatrists-deb... Trump May Be Very Flawed But That Doesn't Make Him Mentally Ill https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121552-trump-may-be-very-flawed-but-that-doesnt-make-him-mentally-ill/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121552-trump-may-be-ve... An Eminent Psychiatrist Demurs on Trump’s Mental State https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/an-eminent-psychiatrist-demurs-on-trumps-mental-state.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/an-eminent-psychi... ----- When Trump announces that journalism will be licensed, and selects Bannon as the head of the new Department of Truth, housed in the old EPA offices, the public will see is as a shame, but necessary.
    - dTal 10y ago
      >When Trump announces that journalism will be licensed, and selects Bannon as the head of the new Department of Truth, housed in the old EPA offices, the public will see is as a shame, but necessary. A fine example of Poe's law.
- pharrlax 10y ago
  That's true. But in every case, someone else in the media points that out very quickly, and usually within hours the problem self-corrects. A great example is the Oval Office MLK bust. A reporter tweeted that it seemed to be missing and it quickly went viral, but within an hour, virtually every reporter and network had realized their error and retracted it. 95% of the people who heard about it heard it not from the hour of media discussion but from the days of administration complaining about that hour afterward. If the administration really was against the spread of false information, that would seem rather counterproductive -- but it seems more like the administration is going out of its way to paint a narrative that the media lies, despite this robust self-correction in every instance.
  - pessimizer 10y ago
    The retractions are seen and remembered by a tiny percentage of the people who incorporate the original story into their world view and continue to spread it, and given a tiny fraction of the coverage (in time and space) of the original story. If not for the administration constantly talking about it since, it would still be perceived as true.
    - arctangent 10y ago
      And of course the accusers know this - it's Politics 101. There's an old saying: "Throw enough mud against the wall and some of it will stick."
    - mcphage 10y ago
      If not for the administration constantly talking about it since, most people wouldn't even know there was ever a discussion about it. Which is why the administration keeps talking about it.
  - have_faith 10y ago
    The incentive is to publish a story first. At the speed of information spreading on the internet that means no time for fact checking any more. A story can reach peak viral before a correction or retraction is even considered. The original story has already gone viral and and may continue spreading long after a correction is made and the media are fully aware of this. It allows them to claim to update stories with facts as they appear but also allows them to publish unsubstantiated stories quickly to get views with no repercussions. You're right that the administration are constantly making stories worse for themselves in how they react, I completely agree. But it's not a case of MSM = bad and Trump admin = good. They both have serious flaws. When I look at my Facebook feed I don't see a flood of corrected stories and retractions unless they have an invested interest in that particular story and happen to support the side being wronged. My Trump supporting friends don't pipe up when the MSM is unfair to a liberal candidate and vice versa.
pipio21 10y ago
You say that 99% is fully deserved because you know the person or his family personally? How relevant it is you believing that is fully deserved? Are you really good informed? I remember hearing about Mark Shuttleworth by acid critics in the press of that Rich bastard that spends so much money to for going to space, money that could be spent on feeding kids in Africa... Later I met the person personally and it blew my mind how much I had been lied and manipulated by the press about the person. The same thing happened as I got to met more and more famous people because of my job. There is a clear bias against Trump, because the same thing is different depending of who who does it but if you can not see it you won't be able to see it, because it means you are emotionally attached to the other side, and you need to detach first. For example, democrats believe it is great that men could sodomize other men and I agree with that, because I believe that what someone does private it no one business. But the same newspapers that believe it is so great to have sex with whoever you want become sexual puritans with the private sexual life of Trump. The same happens with massive surveillance for example, it is so great when Obama does it, because you know, he needs it for going against bad people(under democrat definition), but it is terrible when Trump has it. Now the same newspapers that went against Bill Binney and other whistleblowers, now do interview him and consider massive surveillance bad because it is Trump who controls it. When Bill is asked about it, what he says is: It does not matter who has it, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Bill is objective, people are subjective by nature.
- alphabettsy 10y ago
  I can hardly believe how much bs you've typed, and the irony of your statements.
- tmalsburg2 10y ago
  I don't need to know Trump and his family personally to be able to tell that the terror attack in Sweden that he was talking about never happened. In fact knowing him and his family would contribute nothing at all to clarifying this. Just one example out of many.

OJFord 10y ago

There have been things just outright made up, 'gone viral', and reported on by organs that clearly didn't conduct even the most rudimentary of fact-checking.

tmalsburg2 10y ago
That may be true but it doesn't justify blanket statements about the media being generally biased specifically against Trump. First, untrue things have also been reported about other candidates. Second, the majority of things reported about Trump seem to be correct.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  The majority of things reported about Trump are based on a single sentence he tweeted a year ago, the opinion of a random expert, or anonymous leaks, all surrounded by 5000 words of editorial. The current question being struggled over by the news media is about whether he is mentally ill, as you can tell by going to http://news.google.com http://news.google.com and searching for "mentally ill" (not "Trump mentally ill" just "mentally ill.") They've determined that he's not, although they've found half a dozen psychiatrists and experts who either say that he is, or that they can't say whether he is or isn't due to professional standards, or say that he suffers from a personality disorder, and that the Trump debate should move on to whether personality disorders are actually mental illness, or another class of disturbance. Nevertheless, it might be a positive step to install a psychiatrist to continually evaluate the president in order to remove from power if he shows signs of the illness of narcissism. So what they're reporting is probably true; Donald Trump is probably not mentally ill, and it's probably not appropriate for psychiatrists to say that he is. Why they needed 50 billion articles about it in the last 5 days? Probably just being thorough about it. Is it Time to Call Trump Mentally Ill? (Answer: No. But stay tuned for the follow-up, Is It Time To Call Trump a Pedophile Who Beats His Wife?) https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/opinion/is-it-time-to-call-trump-mentally-ill.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/opinion/is-it-time-to-cal... President Trump is a 'world class narcissist,' but he's not mentally ill, says the psychiatrist who helped define narcissism http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-abcarian-trump-psychiatrist-20170219-story.html http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-abcarian-trump-p... Psychologist Asks Colleagues To Sign Petition For Trump's Removal http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/02/19/psychologist-calls-on-colleagues-to-sign-petition-for-trumps-removal/#4142eab14971 http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/02/19/psych... Trump's mental health debate: What is it about? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38991171 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38991171 Donald Trump Isn’t Mentally Ill. He’s Just Unpleasant, Psychiatrist Says http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/donald-trump-isn-t-mentally-ill-he-s-just-unpleasant-n721766 http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/donald-trump-isn-t... Democrats raise questions about Trump’s mental health http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320018-democrats-raise-questions-about-trumps-mental-health http://thehill.com/homenews/house/320018-democrats-raise-que... A Medical Theory for Donald Trump’s Bizarre Behavior (Subtitle: Many mental health professionals believe the president is ill. But what if the cause is an untreated STD?) https://newrepublic.com/article/140702/medical-theory-donald-trumps-bizarre-behavior https://newrepublic.com/article/140702/medical-theory-donald... Psychiatrists Debate Weighing in on Trump's Mental Health https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychiatrists-debate-weighing-in-on-trumps-mental-health/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/psychiatrists-deb... Trump May Be Very Flawed But That Doesn't Make Him Mentally Ill https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121552-trump-may-be-very-flawed-but-that-doesnt-make-him-mentally-ill/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121552-trump-may-be-ve... An Eminent Psychiatrist Demurs on Trump’s Mental State https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/an-eminent-psychiatrist-demurs-on-trumps-mental-state.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/opinion/an-eminent-psychi... ----- When Trump announces that journalism will be licensed, and selects Bannon as the head of the new Department of Truth, housed in the old EPA offices, the public will see is as a shame, but necessary.
  - dTal 10y ago
    >When Trump announces that journalism will be licensed, and selects Bannon as the head of the new Department of Truth, housed in the old EPA offices, the public will see is as a shame, but necessary. A fine example of Poe's law.
pharrlax 10y ago
That's true. But in every case, someone else in the media points that out very quickly, and usually within hours the problem self-corrects. A great example is the Oval Office MLK bust. A reporter tweeted that it seemed to be missing and it quickly went viral, but within an hour, virtually every reporter and network had realized their error and retracted it. 95% of the people who heard about it heard it not from the hour of media discussion but from the days of administration complaining about that hour afterward. If the administration really was against the spread of false information, that would seem rather counterproductive -- but it seems more like the administration is going out of its way to paint a narrative that the media lies, despite this robust self-correction in every instance.
- pessimizer 10y ago
  The retractions are seen and remembered by a tiny percentage of the people who incorporate the original story into their world view and continue to spread it, and given a tiny fraction of the coverage (in time and space) of the original story. If not for the administration constantly talking about it since, it would still be perceived as true.
  - arctangent 10y ago
    And of course the accusers know this - it's Politics 101. There's an old saying: "Throw enough mud against the wall and some of it will stick."
  - mcphage 10y ago
    If not for the administration constantly talking about it since, most people wouldn't even know there was ever a discussion about it. Which is why the administration keeps talking about it.
- have_faith 10y ago
  The incentive is to publish a story first. At the speed of information spreading on the internet that means no time for fact checking any more. A story can reach peak viral before a correction or retraction is even considered. The original story has already gone viral and and may continue spreading long after a correction is made and the media are fully aware of this. It allows them to claim to update stories with facts as they appear but also allows them to publish unsubstantiated stories quickly to get views with no repercussions. You're right that the administration are constantly making stories worse for themselves in how they react, I completely agree. But it's not a case of MSM = bad and Trump admin = good. They both have serious flaws. When I look at my Facebook feed I don't see a flood of corrected stories and retractions unless they have an invested interest in that particular story and happen to support the side being wronged. My Trump supporting friends don't pipe up when the MSM is unfair to a liberal candidate and vice versa.

pipio21 10y ago

You say that 99% is fully deserved because you know the person or his family personally? How relevant it is you believing that is fully deserved? Are you really good informed? I remember hearing about Mark Shuttleworth by acid critics in the press of that Rich bastard that spends so much money to for going to space, money that could be spent on feeding kids in Africa... Later I met the person personally and it blew my mind how much I had been lied and manipulated by the press about the person. The same thing happened as I got to met more and more famous people because of my job. There is a clear bias against Trump, because the same thing is different depending of who who does it but if you can not see it you won't be able to see it, because it means you are emotionally attached to the other side, and you need to detach first. For example, democrats believe it is great that men could sodomize other men and I agree with that, because I believe that what someone does private it no one business. But the same newspapers that believe it is so great to have sex with whoever you want become sexual puritans with the private sexual life of Trump. The same happens with massive surveillance for example, it is so great when Obama does it, because you know, he needs it for going against bad people(under democrat definition), but it is terrible when Trump has it. Now the same newspapers that went against Bill Binney and other whistleblowers, now do interview him and consider massive surveillance bad because it is Trump who controls it. When Bill is asked about it, what he says is: It does not matter who has it, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Bill is objective, people are subjective by nature.

alphabettsy 10y ago
I can hardly believe how much bs you've typed, and the irony of your statements.
tmalsburg2 10y ago
I don't need to know Trump and his family personally to be able to tell that the terror attack in Sweden that he was talking about never happened. In fact knowing him and his family would contribute nothing at all to clarifying this. Just one example out of many.