Trump's War on Factual News Journalism.

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-virus-outbreak-pandemics-public-health-new-york-e321f4c9098b4db4dd6b1eda76a5179e
Screen Shot 2020-10-16 at 6.28.23 AM.png
NEW YORK (AP) — The Trump White House has installed two political operatives at the nation’s top public health agency to try to control the information it releases about the coronavirus pandemic as the administration seeks to paint a positive outlook, sometimes at odds with the scientific evidence.

The two appointees assigned to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Atlanta headquarters in June have no public health background. They have instead been tasked with keeping an eye on Dr. Robert Redfield, the agency director, as well as scientists, according to a half-dozen CDC and administration officials who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal government affairs.

The appointments were part of a push to get more “politicals” into the CDC to help control messaging after a handful of leaks were “upsetting the apple cart,” said an administration official.

When the two appointees showed up in Atlanta, their roles were a mystery to senior CDC staff, the people said. They had not even been assigned offices. Eventually one, Nina Witkofsky, became acting chief of staff, an influential role as Redfield’s right hand. The other, her deputy Chester “Trey” Moeller, also began sitting in on scientific meetings, the sources said.

Screen Shot 2020-10-16 at 6.30.32 AM.png
It’s not clear to what extent the two appointees have affected the agency’s work, according to interviews with multiple CDC officials. But congressional investigators are examining that very question after evidence has mounted of political interference in CDC scientific publications, guidance documents and web postings.

The White House declined to comment. A CDC spokesperson confirmed that Witkofsky and Moeller were working at the agency reporting to Redfield, but did not comment further.

Moeller said in an email to The AP, “I work for Dr. Redfield who is 100% committed to the science and the thousands of incredibly dedicated employees at the CDC working on behalf of the American people.”

During previous pandemics such as Ebola or SARS, the CDC was the public face of the U.S. response, offering scientifically driven advice to doctors and patients alike. The agency played the same role at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, but stumbled in February when a test for the virus sent to states proved to be flawed. Then, in late February, a top CDC infectious disease expert, Dr. Nancy Messonnier, upset the administration by speaking frankly at a news conference about the dangers of the virus when the president was still downplaying it.

Within weeks, the agency was pushed offstage as President Donald Trump and other administration officials, during daily news briefings, became the main sources of information about the U.S. epidemic and the attempts to control it.

Still, CDC persisted in assembling science-based information that conflicted with the White House narrative. In May, a series of leaked emails and scientific documents obtained by The AP detailed how the White House had buried CDC’s detailed guidelines for communities reopening during a still-surging pandemic. The emails revealed that the administration was vetting CDC’s science through the Office of Management and Budget, rather than relying on its medical experts on the White House coronavirus task force. The resulting news stories of the shelving of the documents angered the administration, and sparked renewed efforts to exert control over CDC, according to current and former officials.

On a Monday in June, the new faces arrived at CDC’s Atlanta offices. One was Witkofsky, who according to federal election records had a minor role in Trump’s presidential campaign.

Witkofsky was installed initially as a senior adviser to Redfield. In a few weeks, she would take over as the agency’s acting chief of staff and gradually become the person at CDC headquarters who has the most daily interactions with him, the CDC officials said.

Senior CDC staff found out about the appointments the week before they happened, according to a CDC official who also spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal agency affairs. They had no office, and no one knew their role.

“They just showed up on a Monday,” the official said.

Presidential administrations appoint CDC directors. And there’s nothing new about a White House seeking a better handle on information released by the CDC, said Glen Nowak, a University of Georgia professor who ran the agency’s media relations for more than a dozen years. But past administrations placed overtly political appointees at HHS in Washington; the Trump administration has taken it to a new level by placing other people in CDC’s Atlanta headquarters, Nowak said.

Before Witkofsky and Moeller, the Trump administration had appointed others at CDC in Atlanta who were viewed by staff with some suspicion. But none of the predecessors’ roles was so clearly to report internal agency business up to Washington, according to officials who talked to The AP.

And Witkofsky seemed a particularly strange fit for the nation’s top public health agency. She studied finance and business administration in college and graduate school, and at one point worked as a publicist and talent booker for Turner Broadcasting’s Cartoon Network. Her political work included being an events director during the George W. Bush 2000 presidential campaign. As a State Department official, she developed an international engagement program for U.S. athletes and coaches.

Her lack of familiarity with the CDC, and how it worked, quickly became clear in meetings, according to multiple agency officials. At one, Witkofsky expressed surprise that the CDC had a supporting foundation, one agency official recalled.

Though Witkofsky was largely unknown, she had met a few CDC workers months earlier. In March, on behalf of the administration, she had worked communications when Trump visited a CDC lab. Clad in a red “Keep America Great” baseball cap, Trump had praised the CDC and assured the public “we’re prepared for anything.” Trump asserted that he has a terrific grasp of public health. “Maybe I have a natural ability,” he boasted.

In her new role, Witkofsky communicated regularly with Michael Caputo, chief of communications for CDC’s parent agency, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, two administration officials said. At the time Caputo’s office was attempting to gain control over the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, or MMWR, a CDC scientific weekly known for publishing authoritative and unvarnished information about disease-fighting efforts, according to multiple accounts.

Witkofsky’s deputy, Moeller, who began work on the same day, is a longtime GOP supporter who worked on the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign in 2004. The most recent post on his Facebook page was a “Make America Great Again” Trump campaign banner.

They wanted him to sit in meetings and “listen to scientists,” said a former CDC official.

Witkofsky was added to CDC’s website when she became acting chief of staff, but Moeller’s name appears nowhere on either the HHS or CDC sites.

An HHS spokesperson said both Witkofsky and Moeller report to Redfield but refused to comment further on personnel matters.

Some CDC officials noted that a pandemic like this involves many parts of the government, and the political people sent to Atlanta have at times helped speed the flow of information coming to the agency from Washington.

But there has been a huge downside, public health experts and former CDC staffers say: damage to the once-venerated CDC.

The agency’s guidance for how to reduce viral infections has been largely ignored by the Trump White House, where officials have refused to wear masks and continued to hold large gatherings with few protective measures.

Witkofsky and Moeller are among officials the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis is seeking to interview as part of a probe it launched in mid-September into allegations the Trump administration blocked the CDC from publishing accurate scientific reports during the pandemic.

The subcommittee’s investigators want to know more about Witkofsky and Moeller’s roles in reported attempts by Caputo and administration officials to gain editorial control over the MMWR and other CDC publications. The investigators are also interested in whether Witkofsky and Moeller were involved in making changes to CDC COVID-19 guidance for schools, as well as agency information that has been changed multiple times on how the virus spreads through the air.

Caputo took a leave of absence from HHS after he described government scientists as the “resistance” against Trump in a video posted online. In an HHS podcast, Caputo accused Democrats in the government, along with the news media, of not wanting a vaccine so as to punish the president. After the incidents gained news coverage, one of Caputo’s top advisers, Dr. Paul Alexander, resigned.
Screen Shot 2020-10-16 at 6.32.41 AM.png
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-politics-virus-outbreak-3db1eb99671dc9549bae010ef7d024f2Screen Shot 2020-10-22 at 3.03.06 PM.png
NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump posted full, unedited interviews that he and Vice President Mike Pence did with “60 Minutes” on Facebook on Thursday before the show’s scheduled broadcast this weekend.

The footage shows Trump growing increasingly agitated as interviewer Lesley Stahl presses him on his response to the coronavirus epidemic, his demeanor on social media, the lack of masks at his campaign rallies and the “Obamacare” replacement plan he has long promised but failed to deliver.

“Are you ready for some tough questions?” Stahl asked at the start of the interview.

“Just be fair,” the president said.

When Stahl asked him about priorities for a second term and Trump talked about having created “the greatest economy in the history of the country,” Stahl immediately broke in.

“You know that’s not true,” she said.

Trump objected and said she wouldn’t address his opponent, Democrat Joe Biden, in the same manner.

In video of Stahl’s later encounter with Pence, she said “you both have insulted ‘60 Minutes’ and me by not answering any of our questions and by giving set campaign speeches that we’ve heard both of you give at rallies.”

She said she was upset by how the interviews had gone.

“Well, Lesley, I appreciate the speech that you just gave,” Pence replied. “But I’ve answered all your questions. And I’ve spoken about the things the American people care about.”

Trump complained about the “bias, hatred and rudeness” by “60 Minutes” and CBS as he tweeted the Facebook link.

The CBS broadcast, the most popular news program in the country, will have the last word Sunday, when it presents edited versions of the interviews, along with talks with Biden and his vice presidential candidate, Kamala Harris.

Throughout the interview, Trump returned to attacks on Biden’s son, based on an unconfirmed New York Post report, and accused the media of being too soft on his Democratic rival.

As Stahl commented at one point that Trump was offering attack after attack, Trump responded: “It’s not attack, it’s defense. It’s defense against attacks.”

“I’m defending myself and I’m defending the institute of the presidency,” he said.

As Trump continued to throw unsubstantiated allegations at Biden and former President Barack Obama, Stahl tried to explain: “This is ‘60 Minutes’ and we can’t put on things we can’t verify.”

But Trump continued to criticize the mainstream media.

“Lesley, you’re discrediting yourself,” he said.

Trump eventually cut the interview short and declined to appear with Pence.

CBS News called the White House’s decision “unprecedented,” but said the interview would air Sunday as planned.

“60 Minutes” is “widely respected for bringing its hallmark fairness, deep reporting and informative context to viewers each week,” the network said in a statement. “Few journalists have the presidential interview experience Lesley Stahl has delivered over her decades as one of the premier correspondents in America and we look forward to audiences seeing her third interview with President Trump and subsequent interview with Vice President Pence this weekend.”
Screen Shot 2020-10-22 at 3.05.38 PM.png
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-aims-to-warp-the-voice-of-america-into-a-propaganda-tool/2020/10/27/ad294bc6-187b-11eb-befb-8864259bd2d8_story.htmlScreen Shot 2020-10-29 at 5.41.09 PM.png

THE U.S. government’s international broadcasting has long had one big advantage over its Russian and Chinese competition: a commitment to independent journalism, rather than official propaganda. Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and other outlets are staffed by professionals who deliver unbiased news reports, including about the U.S. government, earning them credibility and influence with audiences around the world — especially in countries that lack free media.

President Trump is bent on destroying that legacy. Last spring, infuriated by VOA’s failure to echo his hyperbolic rhetoric about the “China virus,” he bullied reluctant Republican senators into confirming his highly partisan nominee to head the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees U.S. broadcasting. That official, Michael Pack, immediately embarked on a purge of the journalistic leadership of the organizations; he also refused to renew visasof dozens of foreign journalists who work for them.

Now Mr. Pack has launched a direct assault on the journalistic code that has been the U.S. calling card. Late Monday night, he unilaterally issued an order he said revoked a USAGM regulation creating a “firewall” between management and the journalism of the networks. His objection is to the rule’s prohibition of “attempts” by USAGM executives “to direct, pressure, coerce, threaten, interfere with, or otherwise impermissibly influence any of the USAGM Networks . . . in the performance of their journalistic and broadcasting duties.”

Mr. Pack would like to do all those things in advancement of his aim to repress reporting that might offend the White House. For example, he already ordered an investigation of veteran VOA reporter Steve Herman for supposed anti-Trump bias. Mr. Herman’s sin was to report, accurately, that Vice President Pence had failed to wear a mask during a visit to the Mayo Clinic. The probe was a blatant violation of the firewall that Mr. Pack now says he has dismantled. In a memo to staff, he unabashedly said he acted so that he could “enforce consequences for . . . biased reporting.”

Unfortunately for Mr. Trump’s minion, the independence of VOA’s journalism is guaranteed not just by the regulation he said he repealed but also by a law passed by Congress, which mandates the “professional independence and integrity” of U.S. broadcasting. But Mr. Pack is not much deterred by legal barriers. According to a half-dozen whistleblowers who filed a complaint with the State Department’s inspector general, he has improperly diverted funds, sidelined executives who told him he was violating the law and tried to investigate the voting history of USAGM employees.

Mr. Pack has drawn bipartisan criticism from both houses of Congress — which he reacted to by ignoring a subpoena to testify to a House committee. On Tuesday, the senior Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Michael McCaul (Tex.), tweeted that “it is unclear why CEO Pack is opposed to journalistic objectivity at USAGM and its networks. Without it, the mission and effectiveness of the agency is undermined.” In fact, Mr. Pack’s motives appear perfectly clear: He wishes to turn U.S. broadcasting into a pro-Trump propaganda operation. Unless Mr. Trump is defeated and Mr. Pack removed, the unique power of U.S. foreign broadcasting will likely be destroyed.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-florida-minnesota-campaigns-58124115393828f85cd496514bba4726
Screen Shot 2020-11-01 at 7.23.18 PM.png
It’s an awkward moment when a presidential candidate greets the audience at a rally and names the wrong state.

Fortunately for Democratic nominee Joe Biden, that didn’t happen to him this week, despite a widely shared video that appears to show him saying “Hello, Minnesota” to a crowd in Florida.

It turns out he was, indeed, in Minnesota. The video that was shared had been altered to change the text on a sign and the podium to refer to Tampa, Florida, instead of Minnesota.

What you need to know about this edited video and the falsehoods spreading around it:

CLAIM: Video shows Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden mistakenly saying “Hello, Minnesota” at a campaign event in Tampa, Florida.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The sign behind Biden in this video has been edited to add the words “Tampa, Florida” and remove the words “TEXT MN to 30330.” The podium has also been edited to add “FL” instead of “MN.” Original video from this event confirms that Biden was in Minnesota and addressed the correct state in his greeting.

THE FACTS: An altered video circulating widely on social media appears to show Biden making a cringeworthy mistake: addressing Minnesotans during a campaign stop across the country in Tampa, Florida.

“Hello, Minnesota!” Biden says after taking the stage. Behind him, a sign appears to read, “Tampa, Florida” and “Battle for the Soul of the Nation.”

Biden continues, “Jessica, thank you for being here, for sharing your story.” Then, the 16-second clip ends.

The video had more than a million views on Twitter on Sunday and was spreading quickly the weekend before the U.S. presidential election. However, the words on the sign and the podium in this video have been manipulated. Several sources prove that Biden did not address the wrong state in his greeting and he was indeed in Minnesota.

An original version of the video on C-SPAN shows it was taken during an Oct. 30 campaign stop in St. Paul, Minnesota. The sign did not read “Tampa, Florida,” but instead said “TEXT MN to 30330.” The podium did not read “TEXT FL to 30330,” but instead said “TEXT MN to 30330.”

Several Associated Press images from the event provide additional proof that the sign and podium said “TEXT MN to 30330” and did not include mention of Florida.

There are other contextual clues as well. The video shows Biden wearing a thick coat for Minnesota’s cold climate. At a recent appearance in the warmer Tampa, Florida, on Oct. 29, Biden only wore a suit jacket.

The Biden campaign also confirmed to the AP that the video was taken in Minnesota.

Biden’s reference to someone named Jessica in his greeting was to Jessica Intermill, a Minnesotan with rheumatoid arthritis who spoke about health care at the St. Paul event before Biden took the stage.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-without-mask-taken-in-2019-b68fcc7c8979bbd2011e52d52e6af37d
Screen Shot 2020-11-02 at 6.08.40 PM.png
CHICAGO (AP) — President Donald Trump’s supporters have seized on a photo circulating on Twitter since late Sunday that shows Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden not wearing a mask while he talks to a campaign staffer on a plane.

Why wasn’t Biden, who has made a point to put on a facial covering throughout the campaign, wearing a mask? Because the photo was taken in November 2019, before the first case of the new coronavirus was reported, and months before global health officials began urging people to wear masks in order to stop the spread of the virus.

The image was shared on Twitter by Trump’s former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, where it was liked and shared from his account more than 50,000 times. Grenell, who currently serves as special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations, was a U.S. ambassador to Germany for two years before resigning in June.

When contacted by The Associated Press, Grenell did not answer questions about whether he knew the image was old before sharing it with his 671,000 followers.

MORE FACT CHECKS:
Mask wearing has become a political issue on the campaign trail, with Biden frequently putting one on in public and Trump rarely doing so, and even mocking Biden for wearing a mask so often.

Here’s a look at the misleading claim:

CLAIM: A photo of Biden talking to a campaign staffer without a mask on a plane begs the question: “Joe Biden doesn’t wear a mask on a plane but wears one outside?”

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The photo was taken in November 2019. At that point in the campaign, the new coronavirus had not emerged globally so Biden did not wear a mask anywhere.

THE FACTS: A photo of Biden on a plane talking with his traveling national press secretary, Remi Yamamoto, both without masks, was taken in November 2019, not recently.

The photo was featured in a Vogue magazine article last week about Yamamoto and her role in the campaign. Conservative Twitter users seized on the image Sunday night, claiming it shows a hypocritical Biden not following recommended mask guidelines while traveling on a plane.

But the caption on that image clearly notes that it was captured by Biden’s campaign in November 2019 while Biden was traveling to South Carolina, before COVID-19 was even identified as a worldwide health threat.

Associated Press reporting confirms Biden traveled to South Carolina in late November of last year, making a campaign stop at Lander University in Greenwood on Nov. 21. The next day, he stopped at a soul food restaurant in Abbeville and filed paperwork to run in the state’s presidential primary.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Screen Shot 2020-11-03 at 10.28.42 AM.png
GREEN BAY, Wis. — Dan Lindner was first in line at the polling place outside Lambeau Field, home of the Green Bay Packers, whose logo loomed as he jammed his hands into his pockets in the predawn chill.

“My mind has been made up for quite a while,” said Lindner, 72, a Trump supporter wearing a “Proud Vet” pin and a paper surgical mask.
When asked whom he blamed for the virus, Lindner pulled down his mask and mouthed a one-word answer: “China.”

As the line grew behind him, Lindner said he believes the virus is being handled properly, and that people are tired, but growing accustomed to living with it. “I honestly think in a few months we will be talking about something else,” said the retired truck driver.

Nearby, Adrian Van Slaars was waiting to cast his vote for Biden, and the coronavirus was foremost on his mind.

“I lost a family member to covid. I almost lost a friend. I lost my job in February,” said Van Slaars, 36, a microbiology lab technician. “I need a president who is not going to take the safety net away from my parents, my grandparents and my disabled daughter."

He became emotional when he spoke about Trump’s handling of the virus. “He openly denied it, called it a hoax,” Van Slaars said, his voice catching. He watched the president’s Monday night rally in Kenosha, Wis. and said he was horrified.

“I don’t understand how anybody can be so flippant when 230,000 people have died, when Wisconsin is in crisis,” he said.
 

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
Amazon Prime has a nifty little series on the Black Plague. Twenty four lectures. Good stuff.

Watching it made me start to think that Trump has not really done anything to society except exploit our natural tendencies that had been repressed for a while.

If you go back to plague times, a small number of learned people understood that the plague was an illness being transmitted through some means that they did not fully understand - not really having a grasp on the nature of bacteria and viruses. Nevertheless, they sought to learn it from and divine whatever information they could about its means of transmission and develop reasonable and practical countermeasures.

The common folk in the villages and countryside were not similarly encumbered. In their ignorance, they quickly developed reasons for it and countermeasures of their own. Perhaps it was caused by witches. Maybe god sent it to them because they did not do the right things. Or was it caused by foul odors. All of these ideas had more currency than what in intellectuals had to say about invisible organisms like bacteria. Fucking magnets, how do they work? Burning the witches seemed much more logical than washing your hands and keeping rodents at bay.

In this same way, the information coming from people of knowledge about the pandemic carry less weight than a meme, which is easy to understand and doesn't make the common folks' brains hurt or make them feel intellectually inadequate.

View attachment 4600632

People have always been like this - stupid, superstitious and easily misled.

But for a while, at least in free societies, this sort of idiocy was held in check allowing us to concentrate on our personal hatred of "the other" through things like lynching and genocide. Electronic mass media temporarily disrupted society's normal dumbness in that it was developed and curated by intelligent people. Radio and television news were not controlled by the masses and held such sway that the usual rumors and gossip had little chance of spreading like an informational virus.

The internet changed all that and the old order was restored. Now anybody can appear to know what they were talking about. Why read a paper when a simple meme on Facebook tells you all you need to know? The common folk, unable to comprehend the difference between fact and opinion were unprepared for it and it is now sweeping through society like it did during the black plague era and Salem witch hunt. We just haven't developed herd immunity to it. We lost the race to educate our population before the dark ages returned.

That's the thing about Trump - whether he was intelligent enough to perceive the problem (my guess is that he certainly wasn't), was led in that direction by those who have made misinformation and manipulation an art form through restriction and control of the media (that would be my guess), or just happened to be in the right place at the right time with a message dumb and dark enough to gain traction with the under-educated, doesn't really matter. All we can do now is hope for a new age of enlightenment.
+rep:clap:
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
link to Washington Post story
Screen Shot 2020-11-21 at 9.21.20 AM.png
A federal judge issued a series of preliminary injunctions against a Trump appointee who has enacted sweeping and controversial changes at Voice of America and other government-funded news networks, effectively stopping the appointee’s efforts to reshape the international broadcasters.

The ruling late Friday by Judge Beryl A. Howell in district court in Washington was a setback for Michael Pack, who in June took over Voice of America’s parent agency, the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), and immediately set about firing senior leaders and disbanding oversight boards.

Pack had asserted the right to direct how journalists at VOA and sister networks such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia covered the news, a violation of the traditional “firewall” that ensures the networks aren’t government mouthpieces. Pack’s declaration was viewed by journalists at the networks as both alarming and ironic, given that their broadcasts — which are intended to counter foreign government’s official censorship and propaganda — would themselves be subjected to potential censorship by a political appointee of the U.S. government.

Pack’s actions and statements — including evidence-free suggestions that VOA was a nest of foreign spies — raised concerns that Pack was seeking to create news favorable to President Trump, his political patron.

Howell’s ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed last month by five senior executives at USAGM whom Pack had fired or suspended in August in what was seen as a purge of those opposed to Pack’s plans. The former employees sought to stop Pack from interfering in the editorial affairs of the broadcasters his agency oversees.

In a ruling issued late Friday, Howell imposed a series of preliminary injunctions that effectively bar Pack from direct involvement in the networks’ editorial operations.

The ruling prevents Pack from making personnel decisions involving journalists at the networks; from directly communicating with editors and journalists employed by them; and from investigating any editors or news stories produced by them.

The judge also said an investigation ordered by Pack early last month of VOA’s chief White House reporter, Steve Herman, “imposes an unconstitutional prior restraint not just on Herman’s speech, but on the speech of [Herman’s editors] and journalists at VOA.”

Pack ordered the investigation of Herman because of unspecified concerns about bias in Herman’s coverage of Trump. But no finding or disciplinary measures resulted from it.

Lee R. Crain, one of the attorneys who represented the plaintiffs, said Howell’s ruling ensures that journalists at the agencies can “rest assured that the First Amendment protects them from government efforts to control” their reporting. “They are free to do exactly what Congress intended: export independent, First Amendment-style journalism to the world.”

USAGM’s representatives didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The order won’t restore the jobs of the employees fired by Pack, including Grant Turner, the name plaintiff (Turner had been USAGM’s chief financial officer when Pack fired him and the other senior employees). The former employees’ work status is the subject of a separate administrative process.

It’s unclear if USAGM will appeal Howell’s ruling given its timing and the likelihood that President-elect Biden is likely to replace Pack upon assuming the White House on Jan. 20. Biden’s aides have said he intends to fire Pack.
Judges letter:
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Engagement through enragement, when people are angry, their perceptions are filtered and empathy cut off.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social media has made us—including Trump—addicted to hate w/ Kara Swisher | WILMORE

If you haven’t unfriended all of your old high school classmates, you’ve probably heard that COVID won’t kill you, vaccines will, and Joe Biden is the senile socialist who los the election. Oh, and Obama’s still coming to take your guns, he’s just distracting us with that book. Here to talk more about America’s disinformation epidemic is author, host of Sway, and contributing New York Times Opinion writer, Kara Swisher!
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/trump-disinformation-journalism-next-steps/2020/11/20/6a634378-2ac8-11eb-92b7-6ef17b3fe3b4_story.html
Screen Shot 2020-11-22 at 9.32.07 AM.png
President Trump didn’t create the media cesspool that he’ll bequeath to a troubled nation. He just made it exponentially worse — not only with his own constant lies but with his ability to spread the ugliness.

Just days ago, he tweeted out a debunked conspiracy theory that a company that makes voting machines had deleted millions of Trump votes. And though he — barring true disaster — will leave office in January, the widespread disinformation system that he fostered will live on.

Social media platforms, streaming “news” channels and innumerable websites will spew lies and conspiracy theories, and will keep weakening the foundation of reality that America’s democracy needs in order to function.

So what, if anything, can the reality-based press do to counter it?

I see three necessities.

First, be bolder and more direct than ever in telling it like it is. No more pussy-foooting or punch-pulling. No more of what’s been called “false equivalence” — giving equal weight to truth and lies in the name of fairness.

I’ve been encouraged to see more of this unabashed approach lately. “Trump wages full assault to overturn election,” read the print-edition banner headline in Friday’s Washington Post. The first paragraph described his “orchestrating a far-reaching pressure campaign . . . to overturn the will of voters.”

And David Sanger of the New York Times began his analysis: “President Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election are unprecedented in American history, an even more audacious use of brute political force to gain the White House than when Congress gave Rutherford B. Hayes the presidency during Reconstruction.”

Earlier last week, “CBS Evening News” anchor Norah O’Donnell and correspondent Paula Reid described the state of the nation in stark terms.

Reid’s first words: “Even as top health experts warned the pandemic is spiraling out of control, President Trump made no mention of it today, had no public appearances and tweeted only falsehoods about the election.” One of the first visuals: A hospital room with health-care workers scrambling to treat covid patients.

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen an opening three minutes of a network evening news broadcast quite like this,” said University of Maine media historian Michael Socolow.

Socolow called it “brilliant showing not telling,” and told me that it was more likely to get through to those in denial because it used everyday Americans — Michigan voters, nurses, etc. — instead of politicians to deliver the message.

Can these mainstream outlets, influential as they are, really go up against the counter-messaging on places like Fox News, or Steve Bannon’s podcast or fact-averse outlets like Newsmax, with its surging, though still relatively small, viewership? On the latter, Trump campaign attorney Sidney Powell was given an unchecked platform to declare: “The election could not have been more rigged than it was.” In what should be astonishing, but isn’t, the Republican National Committee used its official Twitter account Thursday to promote this same lie of hers: “President Trump won by a landslide.”

This battle can’t be fought with facts alone, argues journalism scholar Nikki Usher of the University of Illinois.

The only hope, she wrote, is for mainstream journalism to appeal to passion as well as reason — “providing moral clarity along with truthful content.” Or, as NYU’s Jay Rosen recently wrote, journalism must reposition itself in the media ecosystem, to seize this moment in history to take a clear stance, in everything it does, as “pro-truth, pro-voting, anti-racist, and aggressively pro-democracy.”

In other words, the reality-based press has to unapologetically stand for something. Otherwise, it’s just a pallid alternative to the excitement of burgeoning lies.

And third, journalists and news organizations have to get much more involved in media literacy — working with educators and advocates to teach people of all ages, but especially students, to distinguish lies from truth, propaganda from factual reporting.

This can be an uncomfortable role for journalists because it smacks of advocacy, something that mainstream journalists are taught to be wary of. Still, some organizations and journalists are working on it.

Last week, I was a guest on a call-in radio program on Wisconsin Public Radio, talking about media coverage of the election’s aftermath. Two of the three callers I fielded, though polite, were misinformed. Both were convinced that it’s too early for President-elect Biden to claim victory since the votes haven’t really been counted.

This is untrue. With a few minor exceptions in places that can’t possibly make a difference, the tallies are complete. There is no question that Biden is the unequivocal winner, both in the popular vote and the electoral college.

But I can’t imagine that my responses changed their minds. They sounded dug in. And, remember, these were public-radio listeners, presumably not Alex Jones fans.

Can journalists, mired in our “how we’ve always done it” mind-set, really change their stripes to fight the war on disinformation? Can we be more clear and direct, embrace a moral purpose, help to educate news consumers? And even if we do, will it make a significant difference?

I have serious doubts about the answers to those questions. But I do know that we have to try.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Serious people are coming to the same conclusions simultaneously after looking into the research and comparing it to current reality. The people who will deal with it are keenly aware or they wouldn't be appointed, domestic disinformation and propaganda leveraging racism and social division is the main issue. It radicalized your friends and families with alternative reality bubbles, of not just information, but of social support and confirmation too. It is easier to leverage their existing conditioned biases against them, that deep feeling of how the world should be and your place in it. That's why some are chasing the bubbles as reality busts the more mainstream ones, they descend into cognitive dissidence and denial. Some are just defending their egos, some truly believe, some are confused, most are disappointed.

Look at the republican suicidal insanity in Georgia now, it got away from the republicans too and they might lose the seats.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Right-wing Viewers Upset With Trump's Loss Move From Fox To Further Right Media | Meet The Press

John Podhoretz, Editor, Commentary Magazine; Columnist, New York Post; NBC News Contributor, says that conservatives have to resist going too far down the path to "crazy town."
 

waktoo

Well-Known Member
Right-wing Viewers Upset With Trump's Loss Move From Fox To Further Right Media | Meet The Press

John Podhoretz, Editor, Commentary Magazine; Columnist, New York Post; NBC News Contributor, says that conservatives have to resist going too far down the path to "crazy town."
Another shining example demonstrating the inability of the conservative mind to deal with the mental discomfort brought on by cognitive dissonance...
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/08/newsmax-one-america-news-gain-prominence-they-push-trumps-baseless-theories/Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 7.23.59 AM.png

Since his reelection loss, President Trump has launched a campaign against Fox News and encouraged his allies to tune into more extreme conservative news outlets such as Newsmax and One America News. Trump still harbors a grudge after Fox News called states and the presidency for Joe Biden, and he has expressed admiration for Newsmax and OAN’s more credulous coverage of his baseless voter-fraud allegations.

A new survey suggests it’s having an impact.

The survey from Gallup and the Knight Foundation shows an increase in the number of Americans who name Newsmax and OAN as being among two to three news sources they rely most upon.

Many more still reference Fox News, but Newsmax in particular has risen significantly in the consciousness of American news consumers. In the same survey in July 2019, precisely zero (not just zero percent) of the respondents cited Newsmax; in the latest survey, conducted shortly after the 2020 election, 7 percent named Newsmax. That’s greater than the Associated Press (5 percent) and nearly on par with The Washington Post (8 percent) and CBS News (8 percent).

Combined, Newsmax and OAN gained 11 total mentions per 100 people — up from just one combined in that July 2019 survey. Fox was mentioned by 27 out of 100 people, which is its second-lowest rate in 11 surveys, although not significantly different from previous ones.

Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 7.25.48 AM.png
Other conservative outlets, including the Daily Wire, Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh’s show and the Blaze were also mentioned as much or more than in previous surveys. If you combine them with Newsmax and OAN, they’ve risen from six mentions per 100 people in July 2019 and early 2020 to 19 in 100 people today.

Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 7.26.17 AM.png
Despite no significant drop in reliance on Fox, the survey did show that many people who watch it say they are not fully committed. It asked people what they would do if their news source “decided to change its reporting and commentary to try to convince people it does not favor one party over the other.” Four in 10 (41 percent) said they would continue to rely upon Fox “most often” — less than the 50 percent for all outlets — while 21 percent would no longer use it, which is higher than the 16 percent across all outlets. Another 38 percent said they would rely upon it less.

The biggest decline is in people’s reliance upon local news. The data shows a particular decrease when it comes to local TV, but also a drop in the number of people citing local newspapers, which continue to struggle to survive.

As with the increasing reliance on conservative outlets such as Newsmax and OAN, this has been particularly pronounced over the past two months, in the surveys bookending the election.

The data below on local TV news combines the people citing local TV programs more broadly and those specifically citing local ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC affiliates.

Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 7.26.59 AM.png
It all suggests the election is spurring significant decisions among viewers when it comes to which outlets they rely upon — at least for now. This has accrued in particular to the benefit of Newsmax, which is also borne out in its ratings. (OAN doesn’t subscribe to industry-standard Nielsen ratings, and these numbers don’t show a particularly large shift in its favor.)

It also suggests many Trump supporters are in the market for unquestioning coverage of his voter-fraud claims. In a recent interview with the New Yorker’s Isaac Chotiner, Newsmax chief executive and Trump ally Christopher Ruddy made clear he sees broadcasting baseless claims as being good for business.

“Well, I think before we even make the [voter-fraud] claim, we should say: ‘Hey, look at this anomaly. Why is this the case?’ And we start asking about it,” Ruddy said. “But you know what? At the end of the day, it’s great for news. The news cycle is red-hot …”

Ruddy added: “I would never do something that I thought was wrong or untrue. I didn’t create the news cycle … Donald Trump did. He created this whole thing. He could have accepted the results, but I’m saying, ‘Look at the amazing stuff that’s done for the news business.’ ”

One business, in particular.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/08/newsmax-one-america-news-gain-prominence-they-push-trumps-baseless-theories/View attachment 4762931

Since his reelection loss, President Trump has launched a campaign against Fox News and encouraged his allies to tune into more extreme conservative news outlets such as Newsmax and One America News. Trump still harbors a grudge after Fox News called states and the presidency for Joe Biden, and he has expressed admiration for Newsmax and OAN’s more credulous coverage of his baseless voter-fraud allegations.

A new survey suggests it’s having an impact.

The survey from Gallup and the Knight Foundation shows an increase in the number of Americans who name Newsmax and OAN as being among two to three news sources they rely most upon.

Many more still reference Fox News, but Newsmax in particular has risen significantly in the consciousness of American news consumers. In the same survey in July 2019, precisely zero (not just zero percent) of the respondents cited Newsmax; in the latest survey, conducted shortly after the 2020 election, 7 percent named Newsmax. That’s greater than the Associated Press (5 percent) and nearly on par with The Washington Post (8 percent) and CBS News (8 percent).

Combined, Newsmax and OAN gained 11 total mentions per 100 people — up from just one combined in that July 2019 survey. Fox was mentioned by 27 out of 100 people, which is its second-lowest rate in 11 surveys, although not significantly different from previous ones.

View attachment 4762932
Other conservative outlets, including the Daily Wire, Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh’s show and the Blaze were also mentioned as much or more than in previous surveys. If you combine them with Newsmax and OAN, they’ve risen from six mentions per 100 people in July 2019 and early 2020 to 19 in 100 people today.

View attachment 4762933
Despite no significant drop in reliance on Fox, the survey did show that many people who watch it say they are not fully committed. It asked people what they would do if their news source “decided to change its reporting and commentary to try to convince people it does not favor one party over the other.” Four in 10 (41 percent) said they would continue to rely upon Fox “most often” — less than the 50 percent for all outlets — while 21 percent would no longer use it, which is higher than the 16 percent across all outlets. Another 38 percent said they would rely upon it less.

The biggest decline is in people’s reliance upon local news. The data shows a particular decrease when it comes to local TV, but also a drop in the number of people citing local newspapers, which continue to struggle to survive.

As with the increasing reliance on conservative outlets such as Newsmax and OAN, this has been particularly pronounced over the past two months, in the surveys bookending the election.

The data below on local TV news combines the people citing local TV programs more broadly and those specifically citing local ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC affiliates.

View attachment 4762934
It all suggests the election is spurring significant decisions among viewers when it comes to which outlets they rely upon — at least for now. This has accrued in particular to the benefit of Newsmax, which is also borne out in its ratings. (OAN doesn’t subscribe to industry-standard Nielsen ratings, and these numbers don’t show a particularly large shift in its favor.)

It also suggests many Trump supporters are in the market for unquestioning coverage of his voter-fraud claims. In a recent interview with the New Yorker’s Isaac Chotiner, Newsmax chief executive and Trump ally Christopher Ruddy made clear he sees broadcasting baseless claims as being good for business.

“Well, I think before we even make the [voter-fraud] claim, we should say: ‘Hey, look at this anomaly. Why is this the case?’ And we start asking about it,” Ruddy said. “But you know what? At the end of the day, it’s great for news. The news cycle is red-hot …”

Ruddy added: “I would never do something that I thought was wrong or untrue. I didn’t create the news cycle … Donald Trump did. He created this whole thing. He could have accepted the results, but I’m saying, ‘Look at the amazing stuff that’s done for the news business.’ ”

One business, in particular.
From CBC News Canada
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trump turns supporters away from Fox News after election loss

U.S. President Donald Trump and his supporters have long relied on Fox News to bolster their message. But since the network’s news programs announced Trump’s election loss, the president has been speaking against it and is instead promoting smaller conservative media outlets One America News Network and Newsmax.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Looks like Trump is doing the dirty work, look for simply astounding bribes (campaign contributions) for everybody in congress Zuck could own every one of them millions of times over. Why he doesn't just give Trump a billion to kill it? Zuck figures he's be better off bribing the next administration and congress, he can easily buy them all, though a few are not for sale. Compared to him the rest of you are nothing and will end up being treated like nothing.

Hard to believe that Trump wouldn't offer protection for a price, "Nice little business ya got here Zuck, it would be a shame if something was happened to it..."

A last-minute push to include another round of $1,200 payments to Americans failed. Here's what's being considered instead.

 
Top