Is the Media Even Pretending to be Fair With Their Coverage of President Trump?

“If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re mis-informed.”  Mark Twain

Many of us grew up with the message that the US media was ethical; seeking the truth and informing the public. The assumption was that there were dedicated reporters out there competing with each other to expose corruption, make sure voters knew the good and bad about political figures and that overall honesty was a prerequisite in the “4th Estate.” Today polls show trust in the media at an all-time low. And recent coverage of Donald Trump illustrates why the media doesn’t deserve any respect.

Before I go into how Trump has been given despicable treatment by the corporate media I would like to point to a scene in my book “The Destiny of Our Past  Set in the distant past a group of Noah’s followers are gunned down by government security forces. This is witnessed by corporate media heads but they spin the story to report to the masses that the religious refugees were terrorists.  And while this is a work of fiction so too is the picture the media presents not only of Trump but also his supporters.  Remember what Malcolm X once said, “If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” 

Recently, it was pointed out that 87% of all major media coverage of Donald Trump this year has been negative as noted by an article at “Newsbusters” here:  Of course we might expect this in the editorial pages of newspapers or commentary section of news programs but not, and I repeat not, in pages and reports that are supposed to be objective.  

Of course most of these negative stories are either innuendo or half-truths.  Let us compare the two:
An innuendo might involve the numerous stories on alleged connection of Trump to Russia.  Even with all his political enemies no evidence of any improper involvement of Russia in the 2016 elections has been found.  The reason for this is obvious of course. However, as has often been said, the more you repeat an allegation the more it comes to be accepted as fact.  In fact, many articles have evolved from claiming there are allegations, to suspicions to wording the articles in such a way as to assume they are true.  Generally any counter-claims to the mythology of “Russian hackers” are only mentioned towards the end of the article.  And as any journalist will tell you most people read headlines and the first paragraph of an article; generally forming an opinion and then turning focus to another article.

The second sort of story involves half-truths. This is when an article employs the Clintonian strategy of telling a lie while technically telling the truth.  Remember when Bill Clinton said he did not have sex with Monica? Yes, technically he was telling the truth from a biological or common-law point of view.  However, many took him at his apparent word and felt he really was the victim of what Hillary called “the vast right-wing conspiracy.” It takes skill to be a pro at telling truth (if one takes the words from a legal sense) but in a misleading manner so the audience believes what is essentially untrue.  The examples in the media employing this strategy today against Trump are so numerous that one could probably make a board game out of the stories one could find in one day: roll the dice, get a 3, your task – Find an article where Trump said this but the media twisted it to say that. You have two minutes.” Too much time?

For Trump to still have the approval of nearly half the voters is utterly amazing.  The corporate media – television, print and even most comedy shows – appear to have been given the24/7 mission to portray Trump as if he were the anti-Christ.  Objectivity seems to have gone out the window.  And now in social media we get bombarded by one-minute video snippets that make sure to employ so much propaganda to attack Trump that the king of propaganda himself, Edward Bernays, would have been utterly amazed. You see, good propaganda is supposed to hide its bias, unless your target audience is considered extremely low-educated and lacking in any analytical skills. Hey, maybe that is what corporate media really believes about everyone not part of their club of special elites.

Overall, what can we do about this? Well, the most powerful technique is to make note of who advertises on the “news” sites that appear to believe that the 2016 election is still going, and that they are part of Hillary’s media arm. Just stop buying their products. Also, limit the amount of clicks you make on their sites because, at the end of the day, their internet traffic is what they use to show potential advertisers how many people look at their websites. More visits means higher prices they can charge.  And lastly, keep in mind the apparent agenda of the media, and use every opportunity you get to remind others. Why pretend the media is trustworthy anymore? Seriously, why pretend?

* Like this message? Share on your social media. And also follow me on twitter at: @PsychoMike777

If you enjoy asking quesitons like, "Is our ancient history the way we were taught in school?" or "Where do those in charge intend to take our society?" then check out my new work:  



Popular posts from this blog

The Psychology of a Possible U.S. Civil War

The Propganda Machine You Invited Into Your Home