Posted on 08/14/2018 8:29:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor of the Boston Globe, is at this moment patting herself on the back. She is, in her own mind, a heroine. She alone conceived the idea to encourage newspapers all over the country to publish anti-Trump editorials on Thursday, August 16.
Her big idea is her response to President Trump's relentless attack on those among the media who relentlessly publish fake news. Trump has never said all of the media are disingenuous, or that all of the media publish and promote fake news. He clearly goes after the news outlets who do: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NPR, CBS, NBC, NYT, WaPo, L.A. Times, and too many others.
The president is targeting what has become known as the mainstream media, the MSM, or the "drive-bys," as Rush Limbaugh rightfully calls them. They are clones of one another. There is not an original thought or idea among their "reporters." Their reporters are not journalists in any sense of the word. They all take their marching orders from the leftists who head up each of these organizations. Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, not one of them deviated from the Clinton campaign party line.
Ms. Pritchard, then, is working hard to prove Trump's point. He rages against the leftist machine that is the MSM, and she is bound and determined to prove him right for all to see. She, and all those editors who are jumping onto her bandwagon, is playing right into his hands. How clueless can these anti-Trumpers be? They are mind-numbed idiots, so easily trolled by the master. They see themselves as defenders of the free press!
The only free press today is vast, available to all of us, and thoroughly outside their realm of conformity. They think they matter;
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
This article raises a good point. The msm will march in lockstep to show its independent.
The way the left works reminds me so much of the Hogan’s Heroes episode where the SS officers ran a shakedown on Klink with their “Beautify Berchtesgarden” fund; if you contribute, your name goes in the white book. If you refuse, your name goes in the black book. The white book was full. The black book was empty.
In other words, August 16 will be a typical Thursday.
I’m expecting a mass release of un-redacted documents and new information on the Russian “thing” tomorrow (Wednesday) to prove the point on Thursday that the media won’t cover real news.
All of the Thursday effort to attack Trump, to the exclusion of coverage of Wednesday breaking news, will further prove the Trump point that the media is corrupt and help to further discredit the Fake News Machine.
That’s the way OUR President rolls! Please make this wish come true.
President Trump never said all Muslims were terrorists... instead he said countries harboring terrorist would be banned. The press and then the talking heads immediately misconstrued his words...as they do almost everything he says....they muddy the waters, so to speak, so you can't tell truth from fiction.
Marjorie Pritchard surely understands and sees this.....she didn't misconstrue what Obama or Michelle said, they called it "Misspoke". Ms. Prichard has a responsibility to present fact not fiction.
Now that the daily 4:00 AM drops have been exposed, the MSM has to embrace and justify its obvious collusion in spreading the predetermined “story of the day” across all networks. President Trump has the laser pointer, and all the cats are chasing the little red dot wherever he points it. Trump is inside their OODA loop and they can’t get him out. Enjoy the show...
Sniff, sniff.
Smells like Collusion...
“Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor of the Boston Globe”
“pritchard” is a term used to describe bird excrement!
Can’t be a free press when you are beholden to the Democrat party.
I understand what your saying but the choice of the word ‘beholden’ isn’t quite right.
Beholden suggest a debt and that is not the quite correct.
The Leftist reporters are not in their minds in debt to the Democrats. They perhaps feel that they owe the Democrats fealty or allegiance.
To these Leftist members of the press socialism is something that is article of faith. Democrat politicians are their clergy. The marching orders handed down from on high are imparted wisdom to be acted on as if they were stone tablets brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses.
For the MSM journalist the Democrat Party holds the wisdom of the ages and the faithful must do their bidding or be damned for all time.
Actually, we don’t have to wait. The list, extensive as it is, includes more than just the hundred or so which are lined up to ‘fess up officially. The list is the Associated Press and its member journalism outlets.Alternatively, you could use the list of “official journalism institutions” (scare quotes because that is a constitutional oxymoron) compiled in the McCain-Feingold so-called “law.” I presume that list is perfectly - or very nearly perfectly - coextensive.
I understand what your saying but the choice of the word ‘beholden’ isn’t quite right.Can’t be a free press when you are beholden to the Democrat party.
Beholden suggest a debt and that is not the quite correct.
The Leftist reporters are not in their minds in debt to the Democrats. They perhaps feel that they owe the Democrats fealty or allegiance.
To these Leftist members of the press socialism is something that is article of faith. Democrat politicians are their clergy. The marching orders handed down from on high are imparted wisdom to be acted on as if they were stone tablets brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses.
Actually the leftism of journalists is entirely explicable:
- Journalists are, knowingly, negative. “If it bleeds, it leads.”
- Journalists claim to be objective.
- ”The conceit that negativity is objectivity” is a good definition of cynicism. Therefore journalism is cynical.
- Society, per Common Sense, is a blessing, whereas government is a necessary evil. In a real sense, therefore, society and government are opposites.
- Journalism is cynical about society but - since government is the opposite of society - journalism is inevitably naive about government.
- "The combination of cynicism about society and naiveté towards government” is IMHO (please critique if I’m wrong) the correct definition of socialism.
Actually she does, at least theoretically. There are laws against libel, with the exception that “public figures” must prove “actual malice” in order to win a suit. “Actual malice” is defined as publishing something that you know (or simply don’t care) is untrue at the time you publish it.Big journalism has been so enthusiastic about libeling President Trump that they are IMHO at serious risk of establishing as a factual matter that they knew that they were publishing lies.
You have a good line of reasoning but it doesn’t go quite far enough to explain the lock step with which the journalist of this country march.
Rush has done a good job demonstrating the coordination with which the major news media operate. He will play a series of clips of the different talking heads using nearly identical phases on a given topic (usually the president) over and over again these different news casters use the same phrase.
If it were simply cynicism they would have varying opinions and use different language.
Such identical choice of words does not happen by accident. There is a coordinating force at work here; a group think, a hive mind.
We are the Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
The News Misleadia is a sworn, bitter enemy of freedom and of the American people.
Rush has done a good job demonstrating the coordination with which the major news media operate. He will play a series of clips of the different talking heads using nearly identical phases on a given topic (usually the president) over and over again these different news casters use the same phrase.
If it were simply cynicism they would have varying opinions and use different language.
You are absolutely correct. I explained why a journalist would tend to socialistic thought, but not why all journalists would. That is, if all journalists were the same my argument explains why that “same” would be socialist-minded.And, de facto, there actually is only one journalism. Wire service journalism. There are a number of wire services, and they probably actually do compete in a real sense. But the effect of wire services - each and every one of them - must be (and is) to homogenize journalism. The big one on the block is the AP, which is a cooperative of sorts. You don’t buy the services of the AP, you join the AP - and you pay membership dues and you contribute articles to the AP “wire” which other member journalism outlets pick up.
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)The AP “wire” is a continuous virtual meeting of all major journalism outlets in the country. In Oscar Hammerstein’s formulation, you have to be “naive as a babe to believe” that the members of the AP have been meeting together - not about merriment and diversion, but directly about business - for a century and a half (since before the Civil War) without ever finding common ground against the public interest. I have explained that they do have common ground, and that it lies in propaganda against society and in favor of big government. And “bias in the media” is exactly that.And there is your “Borg.” IMHO
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.