also they are waaaayyy more critical than the first go round where they would not call out anything. I mean I sorta get it. His stuff was just so incredibly stupid and outside the bounds of what a presidential candidate would do that they just did not know how to react to it. Then also to he would do something rediculous each day so it was hard for them to have time and cover the previous stuff more in depth. Even online you would see people (like myself) ask what was the worst or stupidest things he had said to date or just a list of all of them and it was hard to find because there were so many existing and many being created in real time.
I don’t think it’s a “to much material” issue. It’s 100% not wanting to be seen as bias/political by people that argue and conduct everything they do in bad faith. It’s about chasing profits from an audience they aren’t going to get, because they are trying to sell facts to a cult that has been conditioned to discard them outright with no critical thinking involved, just blind deference to Dear Leader. And giving the press a pass is why we got Trump the first time, and certainly looks like will be a factor this time around as well.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, call it a duck instead of “it might be a duck” or “some people believe it may be a duck”. The media is suppose to report what they see/hear, not play favorites or white wash things to placate a section of the country that has gone off the rails. Congress also needs to bring back some type of legislation prohibiting the types of Murdock “reporting” that serves only to muddy the water and/or throw shit at the wall for profit.
also they are waaaayyy more critical than the first go round where they would not call out anything. I mean I sorta get it. His stuff was just so incredibly stupid and outside the bounds of what a presidential candidate would do that they just did not know how to react to it. Then also to he would do something rediculous each day so it was hard for them to have time and cover the previous stuff more in depth. Even online you would see people (like myself) ask what was the worst or stupidest things he had said to date or just a list of all of them and it was hard to find because there were so many existing and many being created in real time.
I don’t think it’s a “to much material” issue. It’s 100% not wanting to be seen as bias/political by people that argue and conduct everything they do in bad faith. It’s about chasing profits from an audience they aren’t going to get, because they are trying to sell facts to a cult that has been conditioned to discard them outright with no critical thinking involved, just blind deference to Dear Leader. And giving the press a pass is why we got Trump the first time, and certainly looks like will be a factor this time around as well.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, call it a duck instead of “it might be a duck” or “some people believe it may be a duck”. The media is suppose to report what they see/hear, not play favorites or white wash things to placate a section of the country that has gone off the rails. Congress also needs to bring back some type of legislation prohibiting the types of Murdock “reporting” that serves only to muddy the water and/or throw shit at the wall for profit.
It’s not exactly the same but that tactic reminds me of the Gish Gallop technique.
oh man this is so what they do. water resistant. no its not. water absorbent. super water absorbent.