Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

politicaljunkie41910

(3,335 posts)
Thu Sep 15, 2016, 06:39 PM Sep 2016

It's been two days now, and I've yet to hear anyone in the media that's has taken the Newsweek

article seriously. Yes Rachal and Lawrence O'Donnell have mentioned it and I've seen a couple of interviews with the reporter who broke the story. He seems to have gone through a lot of time researching this story because the Trump family did not respond to any of his questions or assist him in any way. So the typical news report on MSNBC and CNN goes something like this. Reporter goes through great lengths to lay out his story and why this would result in a major conflict of interest if Trump became president with Trump Org having over 500 undisclosed partnerships with foreigners all over the world, some who have criminal pasts. Then the host asks a Trump surrogate to respond and the surrogate immediately attacks Hillary and the Clinton Foundation. The host then moves along. That's what happens when you put pretty faces out there to report the NEWS rather than real reporters. The pretty faces frown and say, "work is hard". The Newsweek reporter has already connected the dots for them. All they have to do is ask intelligent followup questions and hound the Trump folks like they've spent the past 30 years hounding the Clintons. I really thought this story had legs yesterday, and thought we could expect the media to run with it today. Apparently I gave the media too much credit. I know that Rachel and Lawrence O'Donnell have discussed it and will probably do so again tonight. But if the rest of the media don't grab it and run with it, the story will die a quick and lackluster death.

We need to send emails to CNN and MSNBC and tell them not to let this story die. Also people here at DU can respond to the comment section of the original Newsweek article. If the story gets lots of comments, it'll show that the public is interested.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
2. The sad truth is that if people wanted ti hear it, it would be top of news, or
Thu Sep 15, 2016, 06:52 PM
Sep 2016

people would read it. Sad, but the masses just don't care. And that is main reason it doesn't appear in MSM.

elleng

(131,077 posts)
4. GOOD Test, 'if people wanted to hear it,' RIGHT!
Thu Sep 15, 2016, 06:58 PM
Sep 2016
/revision/latest?cb=20140110032442

P.S., it's on DemocracyNow! today.
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
10. How can anyone miss it, Newsweek is on newsstand, DU , Vanity Fair, MSNBC, Chicago Tribune, CNN, etc
Fri Sep 16, 2016, 06:29 AM
Sep 2016

Heck, it was in my local newspaper. It's everywhere. If a major news program ran a long segment on the Newsweek article, they know viewers would turn the channel.

Not saying it is right, but it is the way it is.

Stupid question -- I have seen that avatar a bunch for well over a decade, but I honestly don't know who it is. Thanks.

Oldem

(833 posts)
5. Chris Hayes
Thu Sep 15, 2016, 07:15 PM
Sep 2016

spent quite a while on it last night; he interviewed the author of the article. I'm going to watch him tonight to see if he follows up. Maybe he won't, since there's a new outrage every day; or maybe he'll have more on the story.

Crash2Parties

(6,017 posts)
7. News shows or sites = news feeds
Thu Sep 15, 2016, 09:02 PM
Sep 2016

There's no cross pollination across end users (ie CNN, MSNBC) until, say, UPI or AP picks it up on the rebound and inserts it into the next day's feed.

sarae

(3,284 posts)
12. I think the news doesn't want to spend time on any issues
Fri Sep 16, 2016, 07:30 AM
Sep 2016

that take more than a few seconds to explain. If it isn't easily understood within a few soundbites, the MSM ignores it. They have their commercial breaks to cut to and Trump surrogates deflecting blame to Clinton take up more precious seconds...I guess it's just too HARD for them to point out real issues. They'd rather just shout trigger words like "EMAIL" that everyone now connects to Hillary Clinton because of the media's Pavlovian training. I'm so disgusted with the whole thing.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»It's been two days now, a...