Quote:
|
I don't think there are any such people, and Sebby says the least sophisticated Rust Belt voter understands he's a con man. (I assume that by "least sophisticated voter" he means "swingingest swing voter" and if I were you I'd be calling him a dick for that, not me.)
|
No. I mean Trump is so obviously full of it that it's impossible to be conned by the man. When he lies, people do not feel deceived the same way they do when the media spins and shades stories.
By the way, Fox is self-parody. Everyone knows they're propaganda and they know everyone knows. They're not deceiving anyone. CNN, the Times, WaPo, and the Journal hold themselves out as real news. When the Journal spins a story to the right, or the others spin it to the left, they're disguising advocacy as fact expose. This is a form of lying.
Quote:
|
If you think there is a non-trivial number of such voters, then you and the rest of us respectfully differ on that. Either way, if those people vote for Trump because someone in the media got a story wrong, that's their choice, not a reporter's fault. Blaming the media for Trump's bullshit, which is what Sebby was doing, is barking up the wrong tree.
|
Bullshit. If a reporter runs out with a story quickly, recklessly, because he's excited that it will damage a candidate or politician, and he subsequently has to walk it back because it's not accurate or verifiable, he's responsible for the fuck-up, and for every bad result it causes. There are fact checking rules to be followed by reputable news organizations. O'Donnell is a silly advocate who trampled them, like Hannity and Ingraham do every night. CNN has had to walk back several "scoops" on Trump's administration, and I think even apologize for a couple. WaPo has had to do the same. That Fox engages in lies all day does not give these people a pass to do the same. Unless they wish to be considered unreliable advocacy networks, like Fox, which indeed is the public perception of them. So yes, the "journalists" are the problem here.
