General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI just had a blinding realization.
Last edited Fri Aug 12, 2016, 04:14 PM - Edit history (1)
This afternoon I was watching a CNN discussion of Trump and Clinton, led by Poppy Harlow. Trump spokesman Boris Epshteyn (sp?) and Ana Marie Cox, currently a political reporter for MTV, were supposed to "debate". And Ana Marie started by pointing out that CNN wanted a debate of issues, but brought together an official Trump spokesman with an unbiased reporter who didn't even support Hillary in the primaries. Why, asked Cox, did they not include an actual Clinton spokesperson, someone who had the facts at hand to actually defend Clinton and the Democrats?
And then it hit me -- CNN is inadvertently buying into the Republican meme that the press is liberal. Over and over again, CNN (and MSNBC as well) have some sort of official Republican (a campaign spokesperson, a current or former Republican office holder) versus some sort of journalist (television, print or Internet-based). Where are the Democrats, the Clinton surrogates, the Congressmen and mayors and Senators and governors?
How do we stop this? Are there simply not enough surrogates for Hillary Clinton? Or are the television news shows too lazy to find a Democrat to talk with the too-visible and too-available Trump surrogates?
JHB
(37,160 posts)It's the "Crossfire" model.
MFM008
(19,814 posts)Harlow makes sure that no matter WHAT a democrat says she points out
1. HRC' s E mails
2. Democrats do it to.
3. Democrats have done it
shes doing it right now at this moment.
Warpy
(111,269 posts)Deprive them of the warm bodies they're delivering to their sponsors with that kind of bullshit "coverage." Make advertising on biased news sources ineffective.
It's not like you're learning something there. They're worse than useless. They're lying by omission.
I turned broadcast news off 12 years ago. I find cable news unwatchable, every minor event a cause for breathless urgency and none of it the least bit informative. If the net goes away, I'll subscribe to the NYT. With print content, it's easier to ignore the ignorant editorial content and the NYT delivers out here.
Nitram
(22,811 posts)...get a subscription to the NY Times or the Washington Post, and listen to some real news on NPR or BBC.
Staph
(6,251 posts)I read both print and online newspapers and other news sources. I read Democratic Underground! (You guys are frequently my best source for breaking news -- well ahead of other sources.)
But you and I and the rest of DU are not average Americans (with apologies to our many posters from other nations). Those average Americans are getting their news from CNN and MSNBC and the nightly news on ABC, CBS and NBC. And from Fox News, but there is no hope of reaching those folks if Fox is their only news source.
The Democratic Party needs to reach these folks by making surrogates available, and by calling out those news sources that consistently overrepresent Republican voices and underrepresent Democratic ones.
And now I'm off to write an email to Poppy Harlow (and the higher ups at CNN) to ask why Boris Epshteyn was not paired with an actual Hillary Clinton supporter.