6 ms·

Trump eyes starting own media company to rival Fox

19 points by typest 6y ago

joezydeco 6y ago
If he wants to make a third-party run in 2024, let's encourage him.
- henrypasta 6y ago
  Not sure why you’re being downvoted. We should advocate for third party runs! It’s great for democracy
- timbit42 6y ago
  It would be fun to watch him lose again.
ajharrison 6y ago
Like his other businesses, it will fail.
tootie 6y ago
There's already a steady rise in unhinged right-wing media (newsmax, OAN) who have shed any fig leaf of journalism and are taking a bite out of Fox. Trump could really set off an arms race in misinformation and pandering.
- dplgk 6y ago
  He already has without having his own news network. Having his own network seals the deal on the indoctrination via the false information bubble he's been working on for over 4 years.
- Yetanfou 6y ago
  Hold it on the unhinged right-wing media hyperbole here, you're just adding fuel to the fire. First off there is plenty of $adjective left-wing media to go around so it doesn't make sense to specifically target right-wing media. The more important factor here is the fact that the majority of the main stream media have a left slant and have been slinging mud towards those with a different opinion for years now, especially since Trump announced his candidacy. It has become close to impossible to find an unopinionated discussion of right-wing thought in main stream media, it mostly just devolves into posturing, labelling and adjectives. Where should people who are fed up with this go to? Even after this constant barrage of accusations of being anything from deplorables to racists and bigots or homophobes or transphobes or any of those other spurious accusations the orange man still got close to half of the votes. While a number of those votes will have been cast by people who truly like Trump I suspect that a sizeable portion of them came from people who were just fed up being called those things and hoped 4 more years of Trump was preferable over the alternative of having a government supportive of such labelling. This realisation probably has come to parts of the DNC as well given the bad outcome of the election for anyone but Biden/Harris. It should be clear to anyone but those blinded by their own ideology that having a less politically biased media would be a good thing. Since the majority of the media leans left and is unlikely to move to the right this currently means there is a need for right-wing main stream media to even out the field. The big question is whether Trump is the one who can successfully fill that void, given the polarising nature of his personality.
  - imustbeevil 6y ago
    > Since the majority of the media leans left and is unlikely to move to the right this currently means there is a need for right-wing main stream media to even out the field. This is the opposite of your proposed ideal. > It should be clear to anyone but those blinded by their own ideology that having a less politically biased media would be a good thing. You should be promoting apolitical news, not increasingly polarized news to "even it out". Moving more right or left doesn't bring anyone closer together.
    - Yetanfou 6y ago
      > This is the opposite of your proposed ideal. No, it is the result of the current media not willing to move away from their standpoint and as such in need of something on "the other side" to create the balance. In an ideal situation the media would be spread over the spectrum but that is obviously not where we - this phenomenon is not limited to the USA - are now. > You should be promoting apolitical news, not increasingly polarized news to "even it out". Moving more right or left doesn't bring anyone closer together. That would not work, neutral views do not balance out left- or right-wing views unless those neutral views are in a large majority. A simple (and greatly simplified) model and calculation can easily show that. Take the GAL-TAN scale which puts political ideology in a 2-dimensional grid with left-right on the x axis and libertarian-authoritarian on the y axis. Ignoring the y axis for now the majority of the media lie somewhere to the left of the middle. If the objective is for the political scale to even out there is an actual need for an even amount of media to the right of the middle, adding media on the middle will still make the scale tip to the left. Moving the left-leaning media to the middle would help but that is not happening any time soon.
      - imustbeevil 6y ago
        I disagree with pretty much every statement you've made here. Extremist views on one side do not "balance" extremist views on the other side. "Left" media is already more Centrist than Liberal/Socialist. Centrist views are already the majority held beliefs. 42% of registered voters are Independent. More Independent/nonpartisan news organizations would definitely improve the political/media landscape better than more extremist organizations.
simplecto 6y ago
I would love to see a spirited and challenging debate here. I won’t hold my breath though :-) There are many merits to more news outlets hitting the public dialog. I think we need more investment not just in news but in search and social platforms. I would go so far as to argue that bifurcation is more beneficial than a unification. Because unification seems to lead to monopoly, and that’s not good for anyone except the monopolist.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  I think "more news outlets" kind of omits the interesting part of the story (the part in the headline).
- Arnt 6y ago
  "More news outlets" you say. That prase includes the word "news". without saying anything about what "news" is. Traditionally that's factual, correct information about new developments in some geographic area or other part of the world. The Trump that spews 50 lies per day isn't going to open an company that's restricted to or even focused on factually correct stories, so I think it's wrong to call that a news outlet, even if Trump himself does so. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/13/president-trump-has-made-more-than-20000-false-or-misleading-claims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/13/president... for example. If you want to argue that opening a fifty-lies-per-day streaming site is a good idea and fine for the world, by all means do so. But please don't call it news.
- JohnTHaller 6y ago
  You're assuming Trump is creating a "news" outlet. Given Trump's... strained... relationship with the truth, that seems unlikely.
  - simplecto 6y ago
    I would say all media outlets strained and stretched relationship with the truth. Trump did not appear out of thin air. The out-of-touch media and politicians created this phenom.
hprotagonist 6y ago
You can run media empires from the bedford hills correctional facility? huh.
mcphage 6y ago
> Some Trump advisers think Fox News made a mistake with an early call (seconded by AP) of President-elect Biden's win in Arizona. That enraged Trump, and gave him something tangible to use in his attacks on the network. Their call for Arizona did seem premature, but it wasn’t wrong. “Correct but a bit early, and didn’t change anything” doesn’t seem like a strong avenue for attack.
- yokaze 6y ago
  If the policy is "you are either with us or against us" it'll suffice.
010101010101 6y ago
It seems to me if Trump is going to launch an online media property he’s more likely to cannibalize Brietbart and OAN views than Fox News. Fox News has the benefit of being readily available via every major cable TV carrier in the US, Trump TV may pull a few members of the MAGA crowd further into their echo chamber, but I doubt that it has any real chance of doing much to the crown jewel of the Murdoch news empire. Maybe if he siphons off one of the more popular talking heads, but even then, how many people will really follow Hannity or Carlson if it’s not as simple to access their content? What will be interesting is how Fox News would react - what’re the chances the commentary shifts harder against Trump to combat competition, but dividing conservatives along the way versus continuing to toe the line and kowtowing to a perceived Trump stranglehold on the right?
- phendrenad2 6y ago
  I don't know, more and more it's becoming more difficult to get to TV channels than it is to get to news on the web. My TV doesn't have an antenna. How do I watch Fox again? YouTube TV?
  - conscion 6y ago
    If someone is older than 50, they most likely have a cable subscription and watch it there. Fox News has never been on broadcast (antenna) television
cosmiccatnap 6y ago
It seems somewhat clear to me that his goal was to run in 2016 and lose so he could start the trump news network where he would proceed to spend 4 years harassing the first female president to great applause. When he won things changed and he decided being the most powerful human alive might be ok too, though in the 4 years he has had it I don't think he really still gets just how much more effort that is than just a show where you get to talk shit infinitely. He will get a news network because he is now a cult leader and even as a citizen he will weird great power, terrible power, but great none the less over a large chunk of the rust belt.

19 points by typest 6y ago

joezydeco 6y ago

If he wants to make a third-party run in 2024, let's encourage him.

henrypasta 6y ago
Not sure why you’re being downvoted. We should advocate for third party runs! It’s great for democracy
timbit42 6y ago
It would be fun to watch him lose again.

ajharrison 6y ago

Like his other businesses, it will fail.

tootie 6y ago

There's already a steady rise in unhinged right-wing media (newsmax, OAN) who have shed any fig leaf of journalism and are taking a bite out of Fox. Trump could really set off an arms race in misinformation and pandering.

dplgk 6y ago
He already has without having his own news network. Having his own network seals the deal on the indoctrination via the false information bubble he's been working on for over 4 years.
Yetanfou 6y ago
Hold it on the unhinged right-wing media hyperbole here, you're just adding fuel to the fire. First off there is plenty of $adjective left-wing media to go around so it doesn't make sense to specifically target right-wing media. The more important factor here is the fact that the majority of the main stream media have a left slant and have been slinging mud towards those with a different opinion for years now, especially since Trump announced his candidacy. It has become close to impossible to find an unopinionated discussion of right-wing thought in main stream media, it mostly just devolves into posturing, labelling and adjectives. Where should people who are fed up with this go to? Even after this constant barrage of accusations of being anything from deplorables to racists and bigots or homophobes or transphobes or any of those other spurious accusations the orange man still got close to half of the votes. While a number of those votes will have been cast by people who truly like Trump I suspect that a sizeable portion of them came from people who were just fed up being called those things and hoped 4 more years of Trump was preferable over the alternative of having a government supportive of such labelling. This realisation probably has come to parts of the DNC as well given the bad outcome of the election for anyone but Biden/Harris. It should be clear to anyone but those blinded by their own ideology that having a less politically biased media would be a good thing. Since the majority of the media leans left and is unlikely to move to the right this currently means there is a need for right-wing main stream media to even out the field. The big question is whether Trump is the one who can successfully fill that void, given the polarising nature of his personality.
- imustbeevil 6y ago
  > Since the majority of the media leans left and is unlikely to move to the right this currently means there is a need for right-wing main stream media to even out the field. This is the opposite of your proposed ideal. > It should be clear to anyone but those blinded by their own ideology that having a less politically biased media would be a good thing. You should be promoting apolitical news, not increasingly polarized news to "even it out". Moving more right or left doesn't bring anyone closer together.
  - Yetanfou 6y ago
    > This is the opposite of your proposed ideal. No, it is the result of the current media not willing to move away from their standpoint and as such in need of something on "the other side" to create the balance. In an ideal situation the media would be spread over the spectrum but that is obviously not where we - this phenomenon is not limited to the USA - are now. > You should be promoting apolitical news, not increasingly polarized news to "even it out". Moving more right or left doesn't bring anyone closer together. That would not work, neutral views do not balance out left- or right-wing views unless those neutral views are in a large majority. A simple (and greatly simplified) model and calculation can easily show that. Take the GAL-TAN scale which puts political ideology in a 2-dimensional grid with left-right on the x axis and libertarian-authoritarian on the y axis. Ignoring the y axis for now the majority of the media lie somewhere to the left of the middle. If the objective is for the political scale to even out there is an actual need for an even amount of media to the right of the middle, adding media on the middle will still make the scale tip to the left. Moving the left-leaning media to the middle would help but that is not happening any time soon.
    - imustbeevil 6y ago
      I disagree with pretty much every statement you've made here. Extremist views on one side do not "balance" extremist views on the other side. "Left" media is already more Centrist than Liberal/Socialist. Centrist views are already the majority held beliefs. 42% of registered voters are Independent. More Independent/nonpartisan news organizations would definitely improve the political/media landscape better than more extremist organizations.

simplecto 6y ago

I would love to see a spirited and challenging debate here. I won’t hold my breath though :-) There are many merits to more news outlets hitting the public dialog. I think we need more investment not just in news but in search and social platforms. I would go so far as to argue that bifurcation is more beneficial than a unification. Because unification seems to lead to monopoly, and that’s not good for anyone except the monopolist.

happytoexplain 6y ago
I think "more news outlets" kind of omits the interesting part of the story (the part in the headline).
Arnt 6y ago
"More news outlets" you say. That prase includes the word "news". without saying anything about what "news" is. Traditionally that's factual, correct information about new developments in some geographic area or other part of the world. The Trump that spews 50 lies per day isn't going to open an company that's restricted to or even focused on factually correct stories, so I think it's wrong to call that a news outlet, even if Trump himself does so. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/13/president-trump-has-made-more-than-20000-false-or-misleading-claims/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/13/president... for example. If you want to argue that opening a fifty-lies-per-day streaming site is a good idea and fine for the world, by all means do so. But please don't call it news.
JohnTHaller 6y ago
You're assuming Trump is creating a "news" outlet. Given Trump's... strained... relationship with the truth, that seems unlikely.
- simplecto 6y ago
  I would say all media outlets strained and stretched relationship with the truth. Trump did not appear out of thin air. The out-of-touch media and politicians created this phenom.

hprotagonist 6y ago

You can run media empires from the bedford hills correctional facility? huh.

mcphage 6y ago

> Some Trump advisers think Fox News made a mistake with an early call (seconded by AP) of President-elect Biden's win in Arizona. That enraged Trump, and gave him something tangible to use in his attacks on the network. Their call for Arizona did seem premature, but it wasn’t wrong. “Correct but a bit early, and didn’t change anything” doesn’t seem like a strong avenue for attack.

yokaze 6y ago
If the policy is "you are either with us or against us" it'll suffice.

010101010101 6y ago

It seems to me if Trump is going to launch an online media property he’s more likely to cannibalize Brietbart and OAN views than Fox News. Fox News has the benefit of being readily available via every major cable TV carrier in the US, Trump TV may pull a few members of the MAGA crowd further into their echo chamber, but I doubt that it has any real chance of doing much to the crown jewel of the Murdoch news empire. Maybe if he siphons off one of the more popular talking heads, but even then, how many people will really follow Hannity or Carlson if it’s not as simple to access their content? What will be interesting is how Fox News would react - what’re the chances the commentary shifts harder against Trump to combat competition, but dividing conservatives along the way versus continuing to toe the line and kowtowing to a perceived Trump stranglehold on the right?

phendrenad2 6y ago
I don't know, more and more it's becoming more difficult to get to TV channels than it is to get to news on the web. My TV doesn't have an antenna. How do I watch Fox again? YouTube TV?
- conscion 6y ago
  If someone is older than 50, they most likely have a cable subscription and watch it there. Fox News has never been on broadcast (antenna) television

cosmiccatnap 6y ago

It seems somewhat clear to me that his goal was to run in 2016 and lose so he could start the trump news network where he would proceed to spend 4 years harassing the first female president to great applause. When he won things changed and he decided being the most powerful human alive might be ok too, though in the 4 years he has had it I don't think he really still gets just how much more effort that is than just a show where you get to talk shit infinitely. He will get a news network because he is now a cult leader and even as a citizen he will weird great power, terrible power, but great none the less over a large chunk of the rust belt.