General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe thing to understand about the National Enquirer...
is you didnt have to buy it to read it.
You didnt even have to consider buying it to read it.
All you had to do was stand in the grocery store checkout aisle and there it was, with pictures and big headlines promising huge exclusive stories.
So even if you were just standing there, the chances it might subliminally affect you are notable.
Hillary Clinton, a crook?
Hillary Clinton, deathly ill?
Donald Trump, the victim of a set up?
All of these things could be communicated without even an actual word being said.
And given the margin in the swing states in 2016, the subliminal impact of tabloid headlines on possible voters was much more substantial than you or I might want to admit.
ON EDIT: What Trump sought to use the Enquirer for as free advertising and disinformation was the same as what the Russians did for him with social media. Two different types of media but same intended result.
CincyDem
(6,386 posts)LeftInTX
(25,556 posts)forgotmylogin
(7,531 posts)Trump got a ton of free advertising and "people are saying" gossip through this.
Honestly after the 2016 election, the Enquirer from what I saw completely reversed and went back to celebrity gossip only.
I've noticed most stores now don't carry as many tabloids, it's more wellness/diet/architecture/history/biography "special edition" coffee-table magazines that are less periodical and more like a softcover book.
LeftInTX
(25,556 posts)Lots of celebrity stuff, but I can live with that.
Wonder Why
(3,252 posts)ArkansasDemocrat1
(1,233 posts)DBoon
(22,397 posts)Tommy Carcetti
(43,198 posts)Publications like World Weekly News dealt with the sensational supernatural stuff that no one in their right mind would believe.
There's a difference.
Wonder Why
(3,252 posts)Ligyron
(7,639 posts)He was gubiner of Florida before flying off to D.C. as (gulp) our Senator.
claudette
(3,599 posts)the magazine isnt the problem. The problem is that there are crazy people who actually BELIEVE the junk in those magazines.
Any rational person, by this time, looks at the National Enquirer and immediately questions their headlines. I'd never believe any of them. (Yes, yes, I know...most people aren't that rational.)
Ford_Prefect
(7,921 posts)in the same way children can be, through emotionalized headlines and outright sensationalized lies.
They do not ask for this manipulation and do not deserve it. No more so than people with little money want a liquor store, or a gun store in their neighborhood, or a drug dealer in the building they live in.
Tommy Carcetti
(43,198 posts)Or the really off the wall supernatural tabloids like World Weekly News?
Because there's a difference between the two as to how plausible their stories might be.
msongs
(67,443 posts)Tommy Carcetti
(43,198 posts)There are a lot of casual voters who arent particularly ideological or deeply involved in following the news, but who still vote.
Seeing an unattractive picture of Hillary Clinton with a negative headline might be enough to plant a seed of doubt in their heads.
Seeing enough of those pictures and headlines only reinforces those doubts, even if its not on a conscious level.
Thats the insidious nature of what Trump was planning on in his arrangement with the Enquirer.
LiberalFighter
(51,094 posts)OAITW r.2.0
(24,610 posts)I scan those and shake my head at the stupidity. Others see it and think, "yeah, that makes sense".
Silent Type
(2,966 posts)has done this before for people not remotely tied to trump. I dont know whether thats true or not, or even if its relevant.
I did a Google search and found articles like one in 2012 N Enquirer entitled, Romney Abortion Bombshell, he got 2 mistresses pregnant.
CanonRay
(14,118 posts)who read the Enquierer and watched pro wrestling who were on the fringe of sanity. They are now a political movement called MAGA.
Sneederbunk
(14,303 posts)unblock
(52,328 posts)And especially if Donnie then talked about it.
Igel
(35,359 posts)Apparently some reporters were shocked by the pay-for-the-story idea.
Really? Batboy was a real thing? Uh ... full human.
Sometimes it's like they have their head under a rock. That's been dropped from dozens of meters up.
gay texan
(2,476 posts)I do miss "weekly world news"
That rag was hillarious!
Blue Owl
(50,507 posts)Martin68
(22,890 posts)Russians did for him with social media. Two different types of media but same intended result."
HUAJIAO
(2,400 posts)I once had a summer job working for a landscaping company. We landscaped/mowed the lawn for the then owner of the National Inquirer - Generoso Pope !!
surfered
(537 posts)who believe this stuff. The same people who believe professional wrestling is real.
DENVERPOPS
(8,845 posts)A lot of the same muck that Hitler did in his early days.......
Tell a lie, and keep repeating it.....
Take control of the Media
ETCETCETC
CarolinaNC
(81 posts)Trump and national enquirer have been buddies. You are right, he fed them disinformation and they used it.
catbyte
(34,454 posts)diverdownjt
(702 posts)Blue Owl
(50,507 posts)PufPuf23
(8,839 posts)orangecrush
(19,620 posts)As usual
WarGamer
(12,484 posts)Tommy Carcetti
(43,198 posts)What you're thinking of are papers like the World Weekly News, which dealt with the crazy supernatural stuff like aliens and bigfoot that no one in their right mind would take seriously.
But people might take gossip about a real person seriously.
Even if it wasn't true.
WarGamer
(12,484 posts)NoMoreRepugs
(9,468 posts)captain queeg
(10,247 posts)They got sued so many times they really toned it down.
summer_in_TX
(2,754 posts)Link to tweet
Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
Hey, lets hope no one asks David Pecker who was *paying* for all Trumps catch-and-kill operations during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, becausespoiler alert!it was the Saudis, who had cut a deal with Don Jr. to illegally interfere in the election in early August 2016.
6:04 PM · Apr 23, 2024
·
116.2K
Views
Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
·
4h
MORE/ How do I know this, you wonder? Well, Im glad you asked. I wrote all about it, with full sourcing, in a NEW YORK TIMES bestseller that was published five years ago.
Maybe people will care *now*? Or no?
Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
·
4h
Youre getting *very warm*, James.
I said that this criminal trial is very much about illegal election interference, and I meant it. Per usual, the good guys are only telling about 10% of the story in order to not ruffle feathers. But America deserves the full truth about this. x.com/JamesSNYC/stat
Show more
James
@JamesSNYC
·
4h
Lets not forget that David Pecker published a glossy custom magazine without ads on Saudi Arabia that was distributed by AMI in the USA. It extolled the virtues of Saudi Arabia and its destinations. A total puff piece. Follow the money. 💰
(Link to the article about the glossy custom magazine: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna868581)
Link to tweet
Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
Saudi Arabia.
Once you understand that the arrangement between AMI and Trump was in fact an arrangement between AMI and Trump and MBS, you understand it all.
Quote
Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
11h
Replying to @KlasfeldReports
Trying to pierce Pecker's claim that the arrangement was mutually beneficial, ADA Steinglass notes that catch-and-kill of the alleged affairs didn't benefit AMI's magazines.
live love laugh
(13,137 posts)I just wish more Peckers would come forward.
moniss
(4,274 posts)used to buy a couple of the tabloids every week. She was convinced about 4 headed aliens and dogs with a head on each end. When challenged she would insist it had to be true in order for a company to print it. Good heart but susceptible mind.
twodogsbarking
(9,822 posts)LeftInTX
(25,556 posts)sanatanadharma
(3,730 posts)Biggest cover story of all: 35 ways the National Enquirer's publisher boosted Donald Trump
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218891876
Always Blue
(30 posts)When I would go through checkout line I either turned them around or put other magazines in front of them.
I think that they should have been sued over the lies. Not just ignored because no one will read it.
NanaCat
(1,251 posts)I never looked at them in the checkout unless someone brought them to my attention for some reason. I'd have to think hard to know what was at the checkout at all. I was busy enough emptying the cart, getting my payment method ready, doing one last double-check of the items against my list, keeping an eye on the cashier's scans, keeping track of my kid when he was young, and so on. I didn't even notice the other junk.
Might have also helped to have shopped at military commissaries for several years during my young adult life. They didn't stock junk at the checkouts so what little of a habit I had with looking at the displays got erased, once and for all.
Of course, now I'm a curbside/delivery shopper, so even less chance that I might see any of them.
Liberal In Texas
(13,577 posts)Very good points Tommy.
mountain grammy
(26,655 posts)Mean.. Ugly.. full of lies.