4 ms·

If you really think that this started with Trump, you must not have been paying attention before. The media (conservative media in particular) hounded Obama ab

by Merad 4y ago

If you really think that this started with Trump, you must not have been paying attention before. The media (conservative media in particular) hounded Obama about some extraordinarily stupid things. Famously there was a significant controversy one time about the color of his suit [0]. I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Maybe the prominence of clickbait/outrage journalism didn't come about until the end of his presidency? Or maybe the incidents have just faded from my memory. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_tan_suit_controversy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_tan_suit_controversy

colpabar 4y ago
I don't remember that one, but I do remember fox talking about how obama was "disrespecting the office" because he took his suit jacket off in the oval office. It was at that point that I realized fox is not a serious news organization, because who could seriously think that was worth talking about? And then when trump got two scoops of ice cream, every major "news" outlet except fox ran stories about it, and I decided to stop taking any of them seriously, because they exist to make money by pissing people off, not to help us understand what's going on in the world.
q1w2 4y ago
It got way WAY worse with Trump. Many news organizations happily threw out their journalistic integrity to "fight Trump". Honest reporting became taboo. You were either FOR or AGAINST Trump, and anyone not choosing a side was just secretly on the other side.
- brewdad 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Some of the stuff they covered was ridiculous, too, but they guy was an absolute machine for creating gaffes and outrageous behavior. Giving him the same treatment as any other candidate would still have looked like "picking on him". If anything, they didn't pick on him enough for some things—I still can't believe the man became President after suggesting his supporters might assassinate his opponent, if she won. And that wasn't spin or bias, that's just what he did, the whole thing's available for anyone to watch. When he did that and his campaign kept trucking along without a hitch was the moment I decided our democracy itself was in danger (which turned out to be very right—maybe I should join a think-tank or become a political commentator or something, I also got a ton of the course of Iraq more-correct than most commentators)
  - ecommerceguy 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
        The call to the Georgia Sec. of State asking to find 11,809 more votes was far closer to the genuine overthrow attempt.
  - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
    …by covering the nonsense of the Trump show, they lessened the impact of the news of the real evil of the attempted overthrow. Instead of being presented as the danger it was, it was reduced to the season finale of the Trump show.
- rewilding 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - overrun11 4y ago
    It is inarguable that there were many examples of unfair or plainly factually wrong reporting on Trump. This list was compiled just a year in: http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-reporters-have-run-since-trump-won/ http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-rep... > But while you're looking, take note of how many articles were on substantive evils he was constantly committing. The implication you are making is that it's acceptable for the media to report inaccurately or unfairly if the subject deserves it.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > It got way WAY worse with Trump. Trump was a birther FFS. He was part of that lovely group of people who thought Obama was the antichrist for wearing a tan suit or eating arugula. He made media worse, not the other way around. They sullied themselves by pandering to his and his supporters' insanity. This happened way before he became president.
anthomtb 4y ago
I remember left-wing media hounding Bush 43 for his pronunciation of nuclear: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/09/why-does-bush-go-nucular.html#:~:text=When%20speaking%20about%20nuclear%20weapons,switching%20of%20two%20adjacent%20sounds https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/09/why-does-bush-go.... That Slate article is actually pretty fair to Bush. But others from that time, which I cannot find, were not so fair. Nuc-u-lar versus nuc-lee-are certainly gave my left-leaning extended family reason for an hour of Bush-bashing at one of our gatherings. While I thought then, and still do now, that the whole thing was ridiculous.
remote_phone 4y ago
Fox has always been biased and never trustworthy. Trump is definitely what broke the rest of the mainstream media though.
lordfrito 4y ago
Before Trump they dumped on Obama Before that they dumped on Bush II and Chaney Before that they dumped on Clinton Before that they dumped on Bush I (I remember the ridiculous attacks on Quayle) I'm sure they did it to Regan too, and Carter before that, and Ford before that. But I would agree that any pretense of "balanced" or "fair" reporting got thrown out of the window with Trump. It's like they aren't even hiding their intentions anymore.
- djkivi 4y ago
  For some reason they don't seem to go after Biden to the same degree.
- BeFlatXIII 4y ago
  Before _that_ that, there was yellow journalism. Before that, there were revolutionary pamphleteers. The Trump hysteria was a reversion to the norm.
godshatter 4y ago
> I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Probably, but the main thing at that time was 9/11 and the Iraq war. Media was pushing the weapons of mass destruction narrative hard, and woe be the person that disagreed.

by Merad 4y ago

colpabar 4y ago

I don't remember that one, but I do remember fox talking about how obama was "disrespecting the office" because he took his suit jacket off in the oval office. It was at that point that I realized fox is not a serious news organization, because who could seriously think that was worth talking about? And then when trump got two scoops of ice cream, every major "news" outlet except fox ran stories about it, and I decided to stop taking any of them seriously, because they exist to make money by pissing people off, not to help us understand what's going on in the world.

q1w2 4y ago

It got way WAY worse with Trump. Many news organizations happily threw out their journalistic integrity to "fight Trump". Honest reporting became taboo. You were either FOR or AGAINST Trump, and anyone not choosing a side was just secretly on the other side.

brewdad 4y ago
[flagged]
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Some of the stuff they covered was ridiculous, too, but they guy was an absolute machine for creating gaffes and outrageous behavior. Giving him the same treatment as any other candidate would still have looked like "picking on him". If anything, they didn't pick on him enough for some things—I still can't believe the man became President after suggesting his supporters might assassinate his opponent, if she won. And that wasn't spin or bias, that's just what he did, the whole thing's available for anyone to watch. When he did that and his campaign kept trucking along without a hitch was the moment I decided our democracy itself was in danger (which turned out to be very right—maybe I should join a think-tank or become a political commentator or something, I also got a ton of the course of Iraq more-correct than most commentators)
- ecommerceguy 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - TheCoelacanth 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
      The call to the Georgia Sec. of State asking to find 11,809 more votes was far closer to the genuine overthrow attempt.
- BeFlatXIII 4y ago
  …by covering the nonsense of the Trump show, they lessened the impact of the news of the real evil of the attempted overthrow. Instead of being presented as the danger it was, it was reduced to the season finale of the Trump show.
rewilding 4y ago
[flagged]
- overrun11 4y ago
  It is inarguable that there were many examples of unfair or plainly factually wrong reporting on Trump. This list was compiled just a year in: http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-reporters-have-run-since-trump-won/ http://thefederalist.com/2017/02/06/16-fake-news-stories-rep... > But while you're looking, take note of how many articles were on substantive evils he was constantly committing. The implication you are making is that it's acceptable for the media to report inaccurately or unfairly if the subject deserves it.
rootusrootus 4y ago
> It got way WAY worse with Trump. Trump was a birther FFS. He was part of that lovely group of people who thought Obama was the antichrist for wearing a tan suit or eating arugula. He made media worse, not the other way around. They sullied themselves by pandering to his and his supporters' insanity. This happened way before he became president.

anthomtb 4y ago

I remember left-wing media hounding Bush 43 for his pronunciation of nuclear: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/09/why-does-bush-go-nucular.html#:~:text=When%20speaking%20about%20nuclear%20weapons,switching%20of%20two%20adjacent%20sounds https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/09/why-does-bush-go.... That Slate article is actually pretty fair to Bush. But others from that time, which I cannot find, were not so fair. Nuc-u-lar versus nuc-lee-are certainly gave my left-leaning extended family reason for an hour of Bush-bashing at one of our gatherings. While I thought then, and still do now, that the whole thing was ridiculous.

remote_phone 4y ago

Fox has always been biased and never trustworthy. Trump is definitely what broke the rest of the mainstream media though.

lordfrito 4y ago

Before Trump they dumped on Obama Before that they dumped on Bush II and Chaney Before that they dumped on Clinton Before that they dumped on Bush I (I remember the ridiculous attacks on Quayle) I'm sure they did it to Regan too, and Carter before that, and Ford before that. But I would agree that any pretense of "balanced" or "fair" reporting got thrown out of the window with Trump. It's like they aren't even hiding their intentions anymore.

djkivi 4y ago
For some reason they don't seem to go after Biden to the same degree.
BeFlatXIII 4y ago
Before _that_ that, there was yellow journalism. Before that, there were revolutionary pamphleteers. The Trump hysteria was a reversion to the norm.

godshatter 4y ago

> I honestly can't remember whether Bush 43 got similar treatment. Probably, but the main thing at that time was 9/11 and the Iraq war. Media was pushing the weapons of mass destruction narrative hard, and woe be the person that disagreed.