Just incredible reporting, Susan. I'm fascinated by American politics. It was interesting how you said that everyone was commenting on Clinton's honesty, what she was hiding but barely questioned Trump's. Think about it, why was there such a disparity in reporting, it was pure envy by the boys and men who never got a chance to know what it was like to always overpower women. If I've understood this correctly, Trump appealed to the men and boys who have felt disenfranchised for the last five or six decades. These kids look back at what Don Draper had in the 50s, and that has "largely" disappeared in Anglo countries. They want to be powerful, and they certainly don't want to get laughed at by women, their greatest fear. Anyway, ranting. You're very provocative and that's so rare in journalism.
I'll warn my dad away from this book, just as I've warned him away from the bitter-AF-Alex Thompson and Jake Tapper book. TY for the thorough debunking.
Susan, as always an impressive account and analysis.. When I looked at the media what
I saw was that Trump was in every news program, ever day, even after he was out of office. The media was obsessed. And I remembered hearing from a patient once that for a politician, all news is good publicity. It doesn’t matter whether it’s good or bad, the person who gets the most publicity wins. We have to give Trump credit. He certainly has been the best at getting the most attention, all of the time.
The tragedy is, Trump has exposed the dark greedy Bellicose side of our culture. Imagine being a person who was about to go to jail himself relishing in jailing people, many of whom are innocent…. And getting the support of half the nation. Even with his drop in popularity, 45% of white people still support him. I live in Alabama, where even the nicest of people supported Jim Crow for ever. So racism and hatred and greed and violence is the norm for white ChristianSoutherners. and for too much of the rest of the nation. Sumter Carmichael Coleman.
I didn't really like Hillary - although she is light-years better than Trump. And some of the criticisms of her campaign were valid. I live in Wisconsin, which she lost by only ~20k votes - and she never once campaigned here. But your analysis of the media bias is spot on.
Similarly, Harris is not the progressive hero I'd prefer, but again, your analysis of the media coverage is as I remember it. Esp: “Trump landed serious blows” and “revealed the holes in Harris’s platform.” “Serious blows” and “holes” are not exactly how I remember that debate."
An excellent and much-needed analysis. Thanks so much!
Yeah Trashy, a lot of them are coming off no different than the enquirer. Now I want to see a comparison to 1948 with how many of these “professionals” have been operating.
Just incredible reporting, Susan. I'm fascinated by American politics. It was interesting how you said that everyone was commenting on Clinton's honesty, what she was hiding but barely questioned Trump's. Think about it, why was there such a disparity in reporting, it was pure envy by the boys and men who never got a chance to know what it was like to always overpower women. If I've understood this correctly, Trump appealed to the men and boys who have felt disenfranchised for the last five or six decades. These kids look back at what Don Draper had in the 50s, and that has "largely" disappeared in Anglo countries. They want to be powerful, and they certainly don't want to get laughed at by women, their greatest fear. Anyway, ranting. You're very provocative and that's so rare in journalism.
I'll warn my dad away from this book, just as I've warned him away from the bitter-AF-Alex Thompson and Jake Tapper book. TY for the thorough debunking.
Excellent. Every word.
Good article!
Thank you Elwood!
Susan, as always an impressive account and analysis.. When I looked at the media what
I saw was that Trump was in every news program, ever day, even after he was out of office. The media was obsessed. And I remembered hearing from a patient once that for a politician, all news is good publicity. It doesn’t matter whether it’s good or bad, the person who gets the most publicity wins. We have to give Trump credit. He certainly has been the best at getting the most attention, all of the time.
The tragedy is, Trump has exposed the dark greedy Bellicose side of our culture. Imagine being a person who was about to go to jail himself relishing in jailing people, many of whom are innocent…. And getting the support of half the nation. Even with his drop in popularity, 45% of white people still support him. I live in Alabama, where even the nicest of people supported Jim Crow for ever. So racism and hatred and greed and violence is the norm for white ChristianSoutherners. and for too much of the rest of the nation. Sumter Carmichael Coleman.
Bravo
I didn't really like Hillary - although she is light-years better than Trump. And some of the criticisms of her campaign were valid. I live in Wisconsin, which she lost by only ~20k votes - and she never once campaigned here. But your analysis of the media bias is spot on.
Similarly, Harris is not the progressive hero I'd prefer, but again, your analysis of the media coverage is as I remember it. Esp: “Trump landed serious blows” and “revealed the holes in Harris’s platform.” “Serious blows” and “holes” are not exactly how I remember that debate."
An excellent and much-needed analysis. Thanks so much!
There was absolutely nothing wrong with Hillary! The problem seems to be you!
Thank you Katherine!
Brilliant, as always.
So generous, as always. Thank you Abbi!
Yeah Trashy, a lot of them are coming off no different than the enquirer. Now I want to see a comparison to 1948 with how many of these “professionals” have been operating.
“What they got from those fragments”— after that, “factually accurate” is presumably a typo?
I can’t find this!!
From toward the end of this section on working class voters getting misleading fragments from the media.
class.” Etc. Etc.
I'd heard all this multiple times, from
the earliest post-mortems on the
results of the election, in which
Sanders enthusiast Michael Moore
joined Chris Mathews in dissecting
Hillary's “disgraceful campaign” (as
Moore described it.) But what the hell,
I'd give it one last try. So I said I didn't
buy Sullivan's narrative. I went on to
remark that working class people
work, and have little time to follow
hearings and speeches as they happen,
but depend on headlines and the
media's sound-bytes early in the
morning and after work--and what
they got from those fragments was
often lifted from right-wing talking
points, premature, or just plain
factually accurate.”
It looks like you meant “inaccurate”
Stand by.
Found it! Thanks!