Posted on 10/16/2016 2:31:30 PM PDT by Kaslin
Following the recent reporting from major news sources about Donald Trump’s alleged sexual assaults against numerous women, he has railed against the media for colluding with Hillary Clinton campaign. In spite of Media Research Center data which shows how lopsided recent coverage of the candidates had been, CNN’s Brian Stelter denied any such effort by the media to sway the election on Reliable Sources Sunday. “This is not just false, it's ludicrous and it's damaging,” he complained.
“In Trump's world, journalists are really just Clinton campaign workers in disguise collaborating with her in an attempt to rig the election,” he said before questioning, “How do we prove that we are not all conspiring?”
The Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan didn’t know how they could convince people and described beliefs of a colluding media as “absurd.” “Nobody is sitting in a room with each other and planning to, you know, do anything evil to a candidate. It's just not the case,” she explained. She even went so far as to say that there was no such thing as “the media,” arguing:
I mean, there are media outlets, there are newspapers, there are cable TV stations, there are network news, but there is no, sort of, little group called “the media” that gets together and decides to do terrible things to Donald Trump. How do you prove that? It's a reality check.
The strawman argument presented by Sullivan is just about as absurd as she believes Trump’s is about the media. The media doesn’t need to meet like a cabal to push an agenda. There are members of the media who admit that the industry is dominated by liberals. And the fact that most of them see the world through a similar prism means their coverage is colored how they perceive it.
CNN's Stelter: It’s ‘False’ and ‘Ludicrous’ that the Media Colluded with Clinton Campaign
Later on in the program, Stelter brought on The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald to discuss the WikiLeaks scandal and the flood of Clinton Campaign e-mails coming from it. Eventually, a skeptical sounding Stelter brought up a select set of e-mails that allegedly show members of the media cozying up to the Clinton campaign. He seemed to suggest that Fox News and others were making something out nothing, saying to Greenwald, “I’ve gotten the sense that they believe there are bombshells.”
Greenwald seemed to pop Stelters bubble by confirming the seriousness of some the e-mails. “Some of them are just normal standard back and forth jockeying between campaigns and journalists. Others though I think are examples of serious impropriety,” he said. He even described Donna Brazile’s passing on of a town hall question to Clinton and not Sanders as “journalistically unethical.”
The CNN host has chalked up his own list of arguable improprieties this election cycle. He didn’t bat an eye when Univision’s Jorge Ramos argued for journalist to toss objectivity out the window. Before the first presidential debate he demanded that Trump receive harsher treatment than Clinton from the moderator. He even attacked Associated Press reporters for exposing connections between the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton State Department. Obviously, Stelter’s claim that the liberal media does not aid the Clinton campaign is also “ludicrous,” or maybe he’s trying to land a spot in Clinton’s next media party.
CNN
Reliable Sources
October 16, 2016
11:14:46 AM Eastern
BRIAN STELTER: [Sigh] Corrupt media. In Trump's world, journalists are really just Clinton campaign workers in disguise collaborating with her in an attempt to rig the election. This is not just false, it's ludicrous and it's damaging. But you know what, his current conspiracy theory is ripped from these pages, the pages of the right wing website of Breitbart News. It says right there, the press is colluding to elect Hillary. That might popup in your Facebook feed, you might share it with friends, and it starts to become believed. You know, these are strange, strange times. Trump even cancelled on his friend Sean Hannity this week. He’s giving no interviews, and by the way neither is Hillary Clinton, as Clinton prepared for Wednesday’s debate.
So, what are the consequences of this conspiratorial talk? Joining me now, David Frum a senior editor at The Atlantic and former speech writer for President George W. Bush. And Margaret media columnist with the Washington Post.
Margaret, what do we even say? How do we prove that we are not all conspiring?
MARGARET SULLIVAN: Brian, I'm not sure how you prove it. It's an absurd claim. I mean, I've spent decades in the newspaper business. I've worked at The New York Times and the Washington Post. Nobody is sitting in a room with each other and planning to, you know, do anything evil to a candidate. It's just not the case. And I also think that this idea that there's something called “the media,” my colleague at the Washington Post, Paul Farry, wrote a piece about how there is really no such thing.
I mean, there are media outlets, there are newspapers, there are cable TV stations, there are network news, but there is no, sort of, little group called “the media” that gets together and decides to do terrible things to Donald Trump. How do you prove that? It's a reality check.
STELTER: Especially now that we’re all media makers. Now that we’re all snapchatting and Facebooking we’re all making media. And I would say, the traditional media, we are competitive we are market driven. I compete with you Margaret. I want to beat you to stories. That’s the kind of thing that discourages what Trump would call “collusion” in the media.
11:27:48 AM Eastern
STELTER: Watching Fox News coverage of this leak this week, this stolen trove this week. I’ve gotten the sense that they believe there are bombshells. Let me put on screen a few examples of what Sean Hannity said really stood out to him. Examples of media collusion between the Clinton campaign and journalists. “CNBC’s John Harwood offering advice to the Clinton campaign. The New York Times allowing edits to quotes of Clinton. The Boston globe pumping up the campaign. Univision pressured to attack Trump. Campaign bragged about media support. And Donna Brazile receiving a leaked town hall question.” Are these isolated examples, Glenn of journalistic improprieties or are they evidence of collusion?
GLENN GREENWALD: I think they’re examples—at least some of them-- Some of them are just normal standard back and forth jockeying between campaigns and journalists. Others though I think are examples of serious impropriety. I think Donna Brazil leaking—getting a hold of a town hall question and only giving it to the Clinton campaign and not the Sanders campaign is an example of cheating. It’s journalistically unethical—[Cut off by Stelter to look at an article he wrote about it on CNN.com.]
…
Brian Stelter originally planned to say it was "ridiculous" and "unfounded", but the Clinton campaign told him to go with "ludicrous" and "damaging" instead.
Brian Stelter originally planned to say it was "ridiculous" and "unfounded", but the Clinton campaign told him to go with "ludicrous" and "damaging" instead.
The Emperor has no clothes.
Do these idiots actually believe their own BS..I think they do, or they are just really good liars..yeah CNN, you are NOT in the tank for Clinton, that is why 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, every second of everyday you dedicate your ENTIRE news cast to trashing Trump..not ONE investigate report on the Clinton Foundation, Wikileaks, corruption or anything else..ALL TRUMP..ALL THE TIME
They’re liberals. Anybody think they wouldn’t lie about this too?
I’d like to hear him explain the montages that Rush plays several times a week of a dozen different anchors, from different networks, using the exact same words.
Not comments that are just similar, but the EXACT SAME WORDING
They know the public have never been aware of, or have forgotten, the Journ-o-List.
They need to take that up with the Beast and company because they’re the ones who wrote about it.
OWN IT!
He hasn’t read the wikileaks emails because it’s illegal to read them.
Chicken Noodle News
Notice the different shapes of eyebrows, and also the different shape of the mouth and chin
"Who are you going to believe; us or your lying eyes?"
Answer: "We know how to READ; we'll believe our eyes you bunch of Hillary Clinton Crime Family enabling WEASELS!"
The media doth protest ...
After what that woman did to me, and to you!
What she did was just ... that Hillary! That woman!
And her hideous grin. Her laugh, that terrible laugh.
LOL.
The Hillary campaign's collusion with the Media is so transparent to any intellectually honest American, and so well-documented on top of that, that the Media trying to feign righteous indignation is going to erode its credibility.
Even Bill O'Reilly admitted the Truth the other day, so let's see the Media go after him for his audacity.
The Media just doesn't like being called out on their cheerleading. They are a laughingstock, and more alarmingly, they are totally illegitimate at this point. And there's no going back.
That's what these fools don't get. They've overplayed their hand so terribly, they think they can settle back into a "normal" situation. We're in a Civil War between the globalist Establishment and the American People, and it's going to be fought on every possible front for the foreseeable future.
The hysterical Media and Establishment just don't have a leg to stand on in this instance.
The Revolution is ON!
Vote Trump!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.