5 ms·
You sure about that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_
by mkr-hn 4y ago
You sure about that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_2016_Uni...
>> 'A 2018 study found that media coverage of Trump led to increased public support for him during the primaries. The study showed that Trump received nearly $2 billion in free media, more than double any other candidate. Political scientist John M. Sides argued that Trump's polling surge was "almost certainly" due to frequent media coverage of his campaign. Sides concluded "Trump is surging in the polls because the news media has consistently focused on him since he announced his candidacy on June 16".[21] Prior to clinching the Republican nomination, Trump received little support from establishment Republicans.[22]'
His own party wouldn't even give him the time of day until he was made inevitable by a fawning press gorging itself on easy ad dollars.
- wronglyprepaid 4y agoNot sure how what you cites implies the media was fawning over Trump, if I recall correctly the coverage was not exactly positive, and I explicitly mentioned singing the praises of, not just reporting.
- mkr-hn 4y agoThat was going off of memory. I might be wrong about that part.
- wronglyprepaid 4y agoHere is an NPR article which shows that media coverage for Trump was less positive and more negative than for the 3 preceding presidents: https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage-of-trump-more-negative-than-for-other-presidents https://www.npr.org/2017/10/02/555092743/study-news-coverage... And you can trust them because they rightly recognize Biden as a historical president: https://www.npr.org/sections/president-biden-takes-office/2021/02/05/963837953/biden-pledged-historic-cabinet-diversity-heres-how-his-nominees-stack-up https://www.npr.org/sections/president-biden-takes-office/20... No matter how much you try and disparage the US press, for the most part the mainstream press are warriors for democracy and one of the reasons why US has such a healthy and vibrant democracy.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
- monocasa 4y agoThere was also Clinton's campaign instructing the media to give Trump a disproportionate amount of coverage under the idea that trump would be easy to beat, or at least making him stronger would make whichever Republican won the 2016 primaries weaker. Didn't work out that way. https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/ https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaig...
- willcipriano 4y agoThis proves quite the opposite once you have a bit of context. This was the strategy of the DNC, they thought Trump would be easier to beat so they promoted his campaign. > How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately "elevated" Donald Trump with its "pied piper" strategy > In its self-described "pied piper" strategy, the Clinton campaign proposed intentionally cultivating extreme right-wing presidential candidates, hoping to turn them into the new "mainstream of the Republican Party" in order to try to increase Clinton's chances of winning. > "We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously," the Clinton campaign concluded. [0] [0] https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/ https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaig...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Akronymus 4y agoSame reason they are funding republican politicians now? https://www.npr.org/2022/06/20/1106256047/why-democrats-are-paying-for-ads-supporting-republican-primary-candidates https://www.npr.org/2022/06/20/1106256047/why-democrats-are-...