America - The Official Thread

[Dotini]

There is still a war between Trump and the press. While he was a candidate, the press should have held the upper hand but somehow didn't. Offhand, I'd say the press is in trouble if it wants to go to war with the President of the US and the incumbent administration. It doesn't help when celebrity entertainers like Madonna say they want to blow up the White House.

 

[IforceV8]

 

[waboo]

It's pretty simple to see why Obama had larger no's turn out. Trump supporters have jobs.

 

[DK]

It's pretty simple to see why Obama had larger no's turn out. Trump supporters have jobs.

Then why did he base his campaign on under-employment?

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Holy 🤬 the press secretary briefing that just happened..... unreal

Holy crap, is this what things are going to be like for the next four years? Instead of using Twitter to pick fights with people, Trump is just going to hold press conferences each time?

Hurray propaganda!

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'd say the press is in trouble if it wants to go to war with the President of the US and the incumbent administration.

That's a worrying proposition. The press should be free to criticise the government. Freedom of the press is usually one of the first casualties of an autocratic regime.

 

[Dotini]

That's a worrying proposition. The press should be free to criticise the government. Freedom of the press is usually one of the first casualties of an autocratic regime.

Agreed. Right now he's just shooting back verbally. Which is refreshing and even amusing. It gets serious when he starts pulling broadcast licenses, imposing sanctions or whatever he's going to do.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It gets serious when he starts pulling broadcast licenses, imposing sanctions or whatever he's going to do.

He's already black-listed several media outlets from the White House press room. Granted, it's the likes of BuzzFeed, but it doesn't bode well for the future.

 

[Joey D]

Agreed. Right now he's just shooting back verbally. Which is refreshing and even amusing. It gets serious when he starts pulling broadcast licenses, imposing sanctions or whatever he's going to do.

I can understand not wanting the media to cover you when they can't seem to produce factual stories. I agree there should be freedom of the press, but at the same time a staple of journalism is ethical reporting...something many of the mainstream outlets haven't really been doing all that well lately. Factual reporting was lacking with Obama and it seems to have gotten even worse with Trump.

 

[Dotini]

Yes, we are on a slippery slope. Trump is not a small government conservative. He is a big government populist, which is another way of spelling fascism the old fashioned way. Recently we've been under the sway of soft-core, left-leaning neoliberal, PC fascism of the elite media, academia and government administration. Now the pendulum has suddenly swung wildly to...who knows what? Military, police, religious, and patriotic factors now may dominate. I don't know. I strongly agree there is good reason for paying close attention. I am an optimist at this point. But there are many who are consumed with fear and paranoia. Run in circles, scream and shout - indeed.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

That's a worrying proposition. The press should be free to criticise the government. Freedom of the press is usually one of the first casualties of an autocratic regime.

Really? Because there is plenty of that to go around in American History if you actually know it, and yet no Autocratic government. So...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Really? Because there is plenty of that to go around in American History if you actually know it, and yet no Autocratic government. So...

I think you've missed my point. Freedom of the press includes the ability of the press to criticise the government. As soon as the government tries to quash that dissenting voice, the press is not free (or at least not as free as it could be).

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I think you've missed my point. Freedom of the press includes the ability of the press to criticise the government. As soon as the government tries to quash that dissenting voice, the press is not free (or at least not as free as it could be).

No I didn't miss your point, I retorted accurately, the press in the U.S. has been limited or outright "quashed" at times by the Government and yet this didn't result in autocratic governments.

 

[Northstar]

Obama had a longtime feud with Fox News that included an attempted ban from the press pool. So yeah, this kind of thing isn't really new.

 

[ryzno]

There's freedom of the press and there is knowingly spreading false information to lie to the public. They need to be held accountable... Criticism is not false stories...

 

[Joey D]

Criticism is not false stories...

This, so much this. Trump is going to do some really stupid things in the days to come that are going to be worthy of criticism. If he starts banning journalist that that are producing factual, ethical stories, that criticize what he's doing, then I'm going to start to worry.

 

[fatkrakr]

Criticism is not false stories...

What exactly do you call that. Surely its not news.

 

[ryzno]

What exactly do you call that. Surely its not news.

I call it his personal, delusional, opinion or the networks propaganda.

Prioritizing the country you lead has nothing to do with Hitler. But I'm sure someone would take that audio clip and run with it.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If he starts banning journalist that that are producing factual, ethical stories, that criticize what he's doing, then I'm going to start to worry.

Well, you should be worried.

The media pointed out that there was a lower turn-out for Trump's inauguration than there was for Obama's. In support of this, they showed two photos comparing crowd sizes taken from the top of the Washington Monument. The photo of Obama's inauguration shows crowds stretching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, whereas the photo of Trump's inauguration showed visibly smaller crowds - there are large patches of ground that simply haven't been filled.

Trump has tried to characterise this as a biased an inaccurate story put forward by an irresponsible media that Preibus has described as trying to "de-legitimise the President".

Here is that image:

And associated story.

 

[ryzno]

Well, you should be worried.

The media pointed out that there was a lower turn-out for Trump's inauguration than there was for Obama's. In support of this, they showed two photos comparing crowd sizes taken from the top of the Washington Monument. The photo of Obama's inauguration shows crowds stretching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, whereas the photo of Trump's inauguration showed visibly smaller crowds - there are large patches of ground that simply haven't been filled.

Trump has tried to characterise this as a biased an inaccurate story put forward by an irresponsible media that Preibus has described as trying to "de-legitimise the President".

Here is that image:

And associated story.

#weathersucks

 

[Com Fox]

Well, you should be worried.

The media pointed out that there was a lower turn-out for Trump's inauguration than there was for Obama's. In support of this, they showed two photos comparing crowd sizes taken from the top of the Washington Monument. The photo of Obama's inauguration shows crowds stretching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, whereas the photo of Trump's inauguration showed visibly smaller crowds - there are large patches of ground that simply haven't been filled.

Trump has tried to characterise this as a biased an inaccurate story put forward by an irresponsible media that Preibus has described as trying to "de-legitimise the President".

Here is that image:

And associated story.

Isn't kind of impossible to match Barack Obama's attendence. Even if the image on the left was real (which I doubt since it looks relatively old compared to Obama's), there are new buildings in the way.

 

[PeterJB]

Madonna's being investigated by the Secret Service for implying she wanted to blow up the White House.

What a tool.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

#weathersucks

Then how do you explain the downturn in television viewers? From the article I posted:

Nielsen estimates 31 million people in America watched TV coverage of the inauguration.

That audience total, measuring continuous coverage by 12 broadcast and cable networks, did beat the 20.6 million who viewed Mr Obama's second inauguration in 2013.

But a president's second swearing-in typically sees a drop-off in viewership. Mr Obama's first inauguration in 2009 was seen by 37.8 million people.

And why did Preibus accuse the media of manipulating the photos? Why not just acknowledge that the inclement weather kept people away?

 

[Com Fox]

Then how do you explain the downturn in television viewers? From the article I posted:


And why did Preibus accuse the media of manipulating the photos? Why not just acknowledge that the inclement weather kept people away?

Doesn't all TV Shows get lower rating nowadays?

TV is on its way out.

 

[ryzno]

Due to having an antenna and similar weather as the inauguration, I streamed it online.
Fox alone, had over 100k viewers...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Fox alone, had over 100k viewers...

I guess that makes it 31.1 million viewers - still well short of Obama's 37.8 million.

And you still haven't explained why Preibus accused the media of manipulating the images.

 

[xyloscissor]

Then why did he base his campaign on under-employment?

The unemployed didn't show up because they like to collect welfare?

The media pointed out that there was a lower turn-out for Trump's inauguration than there was for Obama's. In support of this, they showed two photos comparing crowd sizes taken from the top of the Washington Monument. The photo of Obama's inauguration shows crowds stretching from the Capitol to the Washington Monument, whereas the photo of Trump's inauguration showed visibly smaller crowds - there are large patches of ground that simply haven't been filled.

That means zero, nilch, nada. I already addressed that, if it makes you feel any better Clinton had less in his first one.

 

[fatkrakr]

I guess that makes it 31.1 million viewers - still well short of Obama's 37.8 million.

And you still haven't explained why Preibus accused the media of manipulating the images.

I believe the reasoning is that the pic was taken while there were still long lines at the security check points.

 

[PzR Slim]

#weathersucks

That could well have been the reason nowhere near as many people turned up. However, that is not the point being made. Trump and his presser claimed the media were making up stories about attendance figures to make it look bad. They disagreed there were lower attendance figures, for weather or whatever other reason, even though the facts are staring them in the face.

 

[Robin]

This crowd size fiasco has become big news here, especially when Kellyanne Conway coined a new concept... "Alternative Facts". On the point of lower attendance it does seem unequivocally true that this was the case, even backed up by metro use figures.