Have People Tuned Out Media Outrage?

GetTheseHands

2 For 1 Deal
Banned
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
661
Reaction score
0
President Trump’s job-approval rating hit a new high in a national poll, with support among Republicans building despite an onslaught of criticism of his dealing with Russia.

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll pegged the president’s job-approval at 45 percent, up a percentage point since June to Mr. Trump’s highest score yet in the poll.

His numbers were bolstered by 88 percent approval among Republicans. That’s the strongest support a president has received from his own party since George W. Bush following the September 11 terror attacks.


Mr. Trump’s rating ticked up despite the poll being conducted last week when he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, and then suffered heavy criticism of his kid-glove treatment of the Russian foe at a joint press conference.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/23/trump-hits-new-high-poll-though-russia-issues-ling/


Have we gotten to the point where the media has become so outraged by everything Trump does that their reaction no longer moves the needle anymore?
 
it's not just that...I think more and more people are finally realizing just how dishonest the media is.

I mean seriously, which sources can we trust, or state that they are truly objective and impartial?
 
it's not just that...I think more and more people are finally realizing just how dishonest the media is.

I mean seriously, which sources can we trust, or state that they are truly objective and impartial?


Objective and impartial news is a myth.

These writers use their organizations as shields against their coverage.
 
it's not just that...I think more and more people are finally realizing just how dishonest the media is.

I mean seriously, which sources can we trust, or state that they are truly objective and impartial?

What I find particularly interesting is that, in the face of mainstream media being perceived as untrustworthy, the common response from the "woke" audience is to rush headlong to sources which are likely even less trustworthy than the mainstream media, relying on alternative news sources run by a bunch of opportunistic charlatans.

It's a bit like someone who has lost faith in the medical system to decry "Western medicine" and rush headlong to the ministrations of an unaccredited naturopath who tries to cure malignant tumors with Chinese herbs. Hopefully, in the case of those not trusting mainstream media, they don't end up developing a cancer of narrative - though I fear we may be past that point.
 
Last edited:
President Trump’s job-approval rating hit a new high in a national poll, with support among Republicans building despite an onslaught of criticism of his dealing with Russia.

The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll pegged the president’s job-approval at 45 percent, up a percentage point since June to Mr. Trump’s highest score yet in the poll.

His numbers were bolstered by 88 percent approval among Republicans. That’s the strongest support a president has received from his own party since George W. Bush following the September 11 terror attacks.


Mr. Trump’s rating ticked up despite the poll being conducted last week when he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, and then suffered heavy criticism of his kid-glove treatment of the Russian foe at a joint press conference.


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/23/trump-hits-new-high-poll-though-russia-issues-ling/


Have we gotten to the point where the media has become so outraged by everything Trump does that their reaction no longer moves the needle anymore?

You can only exagerate so much before people believe nothing you say, the guy has done some questionable stuff but hilariously the media have poured out so much crap his faults and failings have been hidden in the mire.
Normally a government hires spin doctors to hide bad news, ironically the people trying to bring down trump are doing the job themselves. I think this may actually be unprecedented.
 
They still have loyal followers, many of whom are posters here.
 
It seems that the people simply do not care so much about Russia as the media would like to believe.

Gallop Poll: Americans don’t really care about Russia
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/gallop-poll-americans-dont-really-care-about-russia/

"The percentage of Americans saying “Situation with Russia” is the most important problem is literally too small to represent with a number. ”
gallop_july18.jpg


Surprising and also very, very bad news for dems, because Russia is pretty much their main political agenda and election strategy.
 
Great topic. The media got so caught up with pushing their agenda that maintaining their credibility became an afterthought.
 
It seems that the people simply do not care so much about Russia as the media would like to believe.

Gallop Poll: Americans don’t really care about Russia
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/gallop-poll-americans-dont-really-care-about-russia/

"The percentage of Americans saying “Situation with Russia” is the most important problem is literally too small to represent with a number. ”
gallop_july18.jpg


Surprising and also very, very bad news for dems, because Russia is pretty much their main political agenda and election strategy.

The poll is "what is THE most important problem facing this country (US) today?". You get to pick one but that doesn't mean people don't care about the other choices. Anyone of us will agree that there are way bigger problems than Russia but it doesn't mean it's not a problem and it's not a concern for some.

Whoever wrote the title and content to that article made a very loose and incorrect conclusion based on the data given.
 
What I find particularly interesting is that, in the face of mainstream media being perceived as untrustworthy, the common response from the "woke" audience is to rush headlong to sources which are likely even less trustworthy than the mainstream media, relying on alternative news sources run by a bunch of opportunistic charlatans.

It's a bit like someone who has lost faith in the medical system to decry "Western medicine" and rush headlong to the ministrations of an unaccredited naturopath who tries to cure malignant tumors with Chinese herbs. Hopefully, in the case of those not trusting media, they don't end up developing a cancer of narrative, though I fear we may be past that point.

I think it's more the open bias than fake, which people are opposed to.
100% negative reporting on Trump is maybe a little bit too much. They can't even mention good job numbers, without saying something negative about Trump. It just doesn't feel like news anymore and journalists look more like left activists.
 
I think it's more the open bias than fake, which people are opposed to.
100% negative reporting on Trump is maybe a little bit too much. They can't even mention good job numbers, without saying something negative about Trump. It just doesn't feel like news anymore and journalists look more like left activists.

Oh, I understand why people are reacting the way they are. It is a comical response though, wouldn't you agree? "Well, you're obviously a crook... I'm going to buy from the guy down the street instead - he's selling 100% grade A snake oil!"
 
What I find particularly interesting is that, in the face of mainstream media being perceived as untrustworthy, the common response from the "woke" audience is to rush headlong to sources which are likely even less trustworthy than the mainstream media, relying on alternative news sources run by a bunch of opportunistic charlatans.

It's a bit like someone who has lost faith in the medical system to decry "Western medicine" and rush headlong to the ministrations of an unaccredited naturopath who tries to cure malignant tumors with Chinese herbs. Hopefully, in the case of those not trusting mainstream media, they don't end up developing a cancer of narrative - though I fear we may be past that point.



Does working for the New York Times make someone any less of an opportunistic charlatan?
 
Does working for the New York Times make someone any less of an opportunistic charlatan?

That's a good question to which I don't have the answer. I notice you aren't disagreeing with my premise though, just doubling back to your "big media is corrupt" mantra?
 
The poll is "what is THE most important problem facing this country (US) today?". You get to pick one but that doesn't mean people don't care about the other choices. Anyone of us will agree that there are way bigger problems than Russia but it doesn't mean it's not a problem and it's not a concern for some.

Whoever wrote the title and content to that article made a very loose and incorrect conclusion based on the data given.

but then, why the media doesn't cover all these "way bigger" problems? They are more interested in Russia and porn stars. In other words, the coverage of media fails to represent the interests of the voters.
 
That's a good question to which I don't have the answer. I notice you aren't disagreeing with my premise though, just doubling back to your "big media is corrupt" mantra?


Your premise is people don't trust media so they listen to liars. My premise as I stated is that Objective and impartial news is a myth. You have a story and then you have coverage. 7 people shot by a terrorist is a story. The person you listen to in order to get the rundown is the coverage, whether it's the New York Times or Paul Joseph Watson. The reason why people stopped trusting media is because for years they made people believe they were objective and unbiased because of their corporate name.
 
Back
Top