There’s no media conspiracy against Trump

'OPINION'

By Robert J. Samuelson
October 19, 2016

Regardless of who wins the election, the press — or, at any rate, what used to be called the “mainstream” media — may be the big loser. Donald Trump is making a case that he’s the victim of an orchestrated media campaign to defeat him, and although the charge is not true, it may stick among his devoted followers.

We live in an era of fragmented news sources. People can pick not only what’s interesting and agreeable but also what confirms their opinions, convictions and biases. There are more choices than ever. A new Pew survey finds that adults “often” get their news from the following sources: TV, including cable (57 percent); online, including social media and smartphones (38 percent); radio (25 percent); and print newspapers (20 percent).

News has become akin to religion; it’s accepted or rejected as a matter of faith, depending on the source. Consider another recent Pew poll. Respondents were asked whether on major issues Trump and Hillary Clinton supporters agree on basic facts, even if they disagree on solutions. The finding: 81 percent said they disagree even on basic facts.

Trump is now ratcheting up this process to a new level of mistrust. The essence of his charge is that most mainstream media reporters and editors (the type of people who work at CNN, The Washington Post and the New York Times) don’t like him, don’t agree with him, or both, and have skewed their coverage to engineer his defeat. There is cooperation, implicit or explicit, with the Clinton campaign.

Trump is right in one sense: Much of the press dislikes him.

Take me as an example. I’m a slightly right-of-center columnist at The Post. I am no great fan of Clinton, but I believe that President Trump would be a disaster. He doesn’t know anything about governing, is proud of his ignorance, stirs hatred of his critics and would throw his opponent (Clinton) in jail. This last threat is one we associate with dictatorships, not American democracy.

I suspect that most Post reporters and editors feel this way, though I have no hard evidence. (For what it’s worth, the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity has disclosed that 480 “journalists” have made nearly $400,000 in campaign contributions, more than 96 percent of which went to Clinton. Many news organizations, including The Post and the New York Times, bar contributions and involvement in partisan politics.)

(Excerpt)

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...477018223949&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.61da24de1cb4

Of course there is no media bias, especially at WaPo they give fair coverage to both candidates. I once saw a pro-Trump article from WaPo, it was up for 10 full seconds before it was buried. No one believes that that "there is no media conspiracy against Trump." The most insidious power of the MSM is to ignore stories unfavorable to those whom they support. The major media outlets doing everything they possibly can to NOT report on the contents of Wikileaks emails embarrassing to Hillary is pretty telling. The total news blackout on the latest O'Keefe videos that have Democrat operatives on tape telling how they incited violence at Trump rallies and illegally coordinate with the Hillary campaign via a text message "pony express" is damning. All while the major media outlets wonder why their subscription numbers keep falling. According to WAPO reports I guess that this means that the hacked emails must be wrong even though all of the evidence clearly points the other way. Hillary has and is being treated with kid gloves while Trump has been raked over the coals.

​

 

Journalism is 20% fact 80% fabricated lies. Fact.

 

Republicans are 95% babies, 5% victims. Fact

 

Didn't see too many Democrats in Nam they were all in Canada.

 

Don't see anymore Men in the Republican party. They have become a party of, dare I say it......... cry baby Liberals. Reagan must be rolling in his grave.

 

Living off their trust funds from their parents' weapons stocks.

 

Gee, I can't say, There weren't too many grunts saying nice things about LBJ, when I flew in on those dust-offs to pick up wounded for evacuation.

 

CNN's lack of coverage of damning evidence against the Clinton campaign, and calling it minor at best, is
proof enough that the media is rigged for Clinton . Had a republican rigged the primaries the left wing media would never shut up about it. But yet all they care about is trump not saying he would accept the defeat , which he did actually. Then ignore the facts of why he said what he said and how he said it.

 

Which one one is burning down cities again?

 

The recent leaks confirmed the media is working hand in hand with the DNC. The press can try to deny it but there it is in black and white. The major news outlets Twitter feeds are ate full of negative reports on Trump but silence on Hillary. Again they can deny it but look at the damn emails, read the stories and it becomes clear to even the most die hard Clintoncrat the media is in their pocket.

The major media outlets are proving just how worthless they really are to the average American in this election

 

Fact: 100% of Clintoncrats support a criminal, who couldn't get security clearances to take out the trash if she wasn't married to a former president

 

That's what comes from getting your "news" from Fox, right wing blogs and talk radio!

 

I hate the word "conspiracy" because it sounds like we're alleging the media met at some undisclosed location and came to an agreement to screw Trump. That is preposterous.

What actually happens is that 97% of the media is liberal/radical and they report only good things about Hillary and bad things about Trump. They do this independently of each other ... on their own. But there's no "secret agreement" to do this.

 

[video=youtube_share;XRFwb8mlMIU]http://youtu.be/XRFwb8mlMIU[/video]

 

Yesterday (day after last debate), it was blatantly obvious that Yahoo's homepage had a strong motive and opinion. Cover articles that were nothing but opinions, one titled "The Trump game is over, SAD!". People were commenting on the blatant bias and the articles were removed only to be replaced by another Anti-Trump cover article. Not a negative word about Hillary.

 

you mean someone like dick cheney.

- - - Updated - - -

they just cant accept the reality that most dont like their ideology

 

Some of the stuff coming out of Wikileaks would suggest otherwise. They show collusion and coordination between the Clinton campaign, DNC and the media

 

Liberals are 96% ignorance, and 4% Weed.

 

But just think of the example she could be for all the little girls in America. Shows them that a woman can accomplish anything if she just marries the right man.

 

Yet they're always the adult in the room.

 

I agree with your title, there's no media conspiracy. What they're trying to do to Trump is no secret, it's wide open, blatant, and out there for all to see. More biased than ever before. I guess they think they're helping Clinton, but they're only helping Trump so the joke's on them.

 

Regardless, there is media bias that leans left. When Bill Clinton's former White House Communications director was part of the post-debate interview process for ABC, not as a known partisan, but as a supposedly neutral new anchor, there's an inherent problem.

 

Is there? Or is it possible that we just enjoy our echo chambers? The media is going to do whatever sells the most advert spots. I think the problem is that we don't want fair and balanced reporting we want opinion pieces that either confirm our position or give us something to b!t@h about.

 

That explains why y'all don't like Fox News.

 

We in this context means Americans, genius.