"I read the news today, oh boy."
The news you read and see may not be the news others read and see. We all know this. But do we experience it?
 |
| NY Times" "Citing no evidence" |
The Trump White House is working to change the message from ties between Russia and the Trump campaign and Trump associates and Trump himself. We have seen how forceful and masterfully he manipulates the media with diversions. It works magnificently, and it works even among people who are fully aware of what he is doing and who are simultaneously pointing out what he is doing and condemning it.
The media observes: He is creating a diversion! He is making a crazy accusation! It is an obvious ploy!
And then they follow the diversion, explain the accusation, and fall for the ploy even as they explain it is a ploy.
It doesn't matter that they know it is a ploy. Trump knows that the news media covers what is newsworthy and he says things that are newsworthy. He understands the motivation of the news media as well or better than the media itself. They are a business of finding an audience and Trump builds an audience.
 |
| CNN: "offering no evidence" |
Republican officeholders cannot ignore them. Lots of Republican voters watch Fox. It tells them what they want to hear.
Trump has a bedrock of support in part because Trump expressed what a great many people feel. Part of why they feel that way is that the news they get confirms and reconfirms a narrative:
That the mainstream press--i.e. everyone except Fox and talk radio--is dishonest.
That experts of all kinds--academics, economists, foreign policy mavens--are sissified and "globalist" and "multicultural" rather than traditional American.
That traditional American people with traditional American values are under siege from a dystopian future of new people and bad ideas.
People who do not watch Fox News underestimate how thorough and pervasive is that news stream. I urge readers to spend ten minutes a day watching Fox and Friends in the morning. If the idea feels foreign or wrong or a waste of time consider it a form of sightseeing or tourism. This is your country, too.
The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post and other examples of "mainstream news" describe Trump's accusation of Susan Rice as an obvious ploy.
The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post and other examples of "mainstream news" describe Trump's accusation of Susan Rice as an obvious ploy.
Meanwhile, Fox News--particularly the TV version and less so the written web version--is relentless is accepting at full throated indignation the correctness of the Trump narrative.
 |
| They answer the question: Yes!! |
O'Reilly: "Senator, we begin with you. How do you assess the situation so far? Say 10 is the most serious story. One is the least serious. Where is this?"
Sen James Lankford (R-OK) Senate Intelligence Committee Member: "I would say its is pretty high, close to a 10. Because the accusations as it sits out there is that the Obama administration and people within the Obama administration were using their office in excess too official documents to get access to then political accusations. Trios is the same accusations flying around with the IRS, for instance, that the IRS was using their tools for political purposes to be able to silent conservatives."
The news story on Fox is headlined "The Susan Rice SCANDAL." Scandal is a given; it is not argued, it is presumed. That is how the story is headlined and presented: a report on the Susan Rice scandal, an affront to liberty, a crime, an outrage.
What Trump speculates Susan Rice might have done is much worse than Watergate. Fox newsreaders adopt a tone of shock, outrage, and alarm. America is held hostage, again and still, by Obama and his tyranny.
The Gallup and Pew polls report that Trump's support has now fallen toward 35%. Trump opponents take pleasure and comfort in this, thinking that Trump's influence is diminished.
They misunderstand the political pressure points.
Republican voters who watch Fox do not consider Trump to have made errors or to be creating news diversions. The story is the leaks of, not what was leaked. They are not surprised that Devin Nunes went to the White House to report consult with Trump's people on creating the Susan Rice diversion. They are not troubled by his 180 degree reversal on American involvement in Syria. They do not hear it or see it. Fox/Breitbart are sanitized. It is state television, familiar to viewers in China and the Soviet Union.
What they see is a strong and courageous Donald Trump being criticized and hounded unfairly by Obama and his media allies and they see newsreaders and opinion hosts standing indignant that their righteous leader is questioned. And that 35% of highly motivated voters are the people who Republican officeholders must watch closely. Their support protects them in a primary election and their support is the motivated base in a general election. It may not be a majority of the people but it is a majority of people who turn out to vote in elections, even presidential elections. For people in red states and red congressional districts they are the majority that must be served, and they know what they think because they see the news that makes sense to them.
The news story on Fox is headlined "The Susan Rice SCANDAL." Scandal is a given; it is not argued, it is presumed. That is how the story is headlined and presented: a report on the Susan Rice scandal, an affront to liberty, a crime, an outrage.
What Trump speculates Susan Rice might have done is much worse than Watergate. Fox newsreaders adopt a tone of shock, outrage, and alarm. America is held hostage, again and still, by Obama and his tyranny.
The Gallup and Pew polls report that Trump's support has now fallen toward 35%. Trump opponents take pleasure and comfort in this, thinking that Trump's influence is diminished.
They misunderstand the political pressure points.
Republican voters who watch Fox do not consider Trump to have made errors or to be creating news diversions. The story is the leaks of, not what was leaked. They are not surprised that Devin Nunes went to the White House to report consult with Trump's people on creating the Susan Rice diversion. They are not troubled by his 180 degree reversal on American involvement in Syria. They do not hear it or see it. Fox/Breitbart are sanitized. It is state television, familiar to viewers in China and the Soviet Union.
What they see is a strong and courageous Donald Trump being criticized and hounded unfairly by Obama and his media allies and they see newsreaders and opinion hosts standing indignant that their righteous leader is questioned. And that 35% of highly motivated voters are the people who Republican officeholders must watch closely. Their support protects them in a primary election and their support is the motivated base in a general election. It may not be a majority of the people but it is a majority of people who turn out to vote in elections, even presidential elections. For people in red states and red congressional districts they are the majority that must be served, and they know what they think because they see the news that makes sense to them.
1 comment:
Susan Rice was Obama's top intelligence political appointee. As such, she made exculpatory and unsubtantiated intel statements on Benghazi that became a "scandal". At Obama's end, she reviewed classified intel on Trump officials' Russia communications. She then expanded the list of politicsl appointees with access to the classified phone transcripts. Some of those appointees then serially leaked that classified content to left media, which now seeks to minimize the violations to protect their leaker sources.
This is a major national security breach with Rice at its origins. But for right media like Fox, these intel events would not have become a political scandal. They will now be investigated in tandem with Trumps Russia scandal. Whuch is the "state media", Fox or the New York Times? It is by having both that we are as informed as we are.
Post a Comment