Bernie Sanders

LS_Editor

(893 posts) Tue Dec 15, 2015, 12:02 PM Dec 2015

Corporate Media: Bernie Sanders "Too Serious" for American People

Biting political satire with the corporate media in the crosshair. It chastises the corporate media for it censorship of Bernie Sanders, and charges the largest media outlets of engaging in yellow journalism.

Corporate Media: Bernie Sanders "Too Serious" for American People

WASHINGTON (The Nil Admirari) - Today, the largest corporate media outlets in the United States confessed they were purposely ignoring U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont - a Democratic presidential candidate - as much as they could. The corporate media syndicate asserted Sanders was "too serious" about running for president, and his focus on all the negative characteristics of the United States made him "too pessimistic and objective" for an American public that must focus on being afraid of terrorism, conformity to the status quo, celebrity drama, and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Titan added, "Do any of you know about an epidemic of meth addiction in the United States? Of course most of you don't, because things like that are not really important to us. This is a new golden age of yellow journalism where we distract Americans with sensationalist lies while ignoring facts and promoting conformity to the current system."

"So it's a nonstarter when Bernie Sanders talks about healthcare for all Americans, repairing and updating America's crumbling infrastructure, saving the middle class from worsening income inequality, and a whole host of other very serious topics. We'll just cover Trump, or the latest mass shooting or celebrity gossip," explained Titan.

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Corporate Media: Bernie Sanders "Too Serious" for American People (Original Post) LS_Editor Dec 2015 OP

So..Corporate Media Insults fredamae Dec 2015 #1

K & R ! TIME TO PANIC Dec 2015 #2

He's not a natural performer Rebkeh Dec 2015 #3

I actually think they'd get more eyeballs on the screen if they told the truth. Fawke Em Dec 2015 #4

I agree n/t Rebkeh Dec 2015 #5

That's right, Bernie's unelectable cuz he's not a Kardashian President appalachiablue Dec 2015 #6

I think he is very electable, and Hillary supporters are going to get a big surprise. LS_Editor Dec 2015 #7

That is my same belief. Go Bernie! appalachiablue Dec 2015 #8

Mine too! Pastiche423 Dec 2015 #9

I was for Obama before that was cool in 2008. LS_Editor Dec 2015 #11

The only time I pay attention is when Bernie is on. malokvale77 Dec 2015 #10

Only if that dumbing down thing works... MrMickeysMom Dec 2015 #12

Will they pretend he isn't there when he is elected president? Rosa Luxemburg Dec 2015 #13

That would be something. LS_Editor Dec 2015 #14

fredamae

(4,458 posts)

1. So..Corporate Media Insults

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 12:10 PM

Dec 2015

the intelligence of it's audience(s)......Again. And "some people" Still tune in? Why?

TIME TO PANIC

(1,894 posts)

2. K & R !

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 12:16 PM

Dec 2015

Rebkeh

(2,450 posts)

3. He's not a natural performer

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 12:29 PM

Dec 2015

Stage presence and charisma are helpful to politicians but not necessary for leadership itself. A portion of the population tunes out if the person onscreen or on stage doesn't engage them, the most popular presidents have been charismatic and had good orator skills.

Bernie is more real, which I personally prefer - politics and governance are not supposed to be inherently entertaining. I remember when the news was boring.

The media has a dilemma, they need eyeballs on the screen in order to stay relevant but leaders are not "celebrities."

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)

4. I actually think they'd get more eyeballs on the screen if they told the truth.

Reply to Rebkeh (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 01:55 PM

Dec 2015

Right now, they fight for partisans.

Rebkeh

(2,450 posts)

5. I agree n/t

Reply to Fawke Em (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 02:41 PM

Dec 2015

appalachiablue

(41,145 posts)

6. That's right, Bernie's unelectable cuz he's not a Kardashian President

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 03:01 PM

Dec 2015

LS_Editor

(893 posts)

7. I think he is very electable, and Hillary supporters are going to get a big surprise.

Reply to appalachiablue (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 03:22 PM

Dec 2015

One that will rain on their premature celebration.

And Bernie will do it with the media censoring him.

appalachiablue

(41,145 posts)

8. That is my same belief. Go Bernie!

Reply to LS_Editor (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 05:33 PM

Dec 2015

Pastiche423

(15,406 posts)

9. Mine too!

Reply to appalachiablue (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 15, 2015, 08:42 PM

Dec 2015

This is the 1st campaign since I 1st voted in 1972 that I have a extremely strong feeling that I know who will be our next president.

LS_Editor

(893 posts)

11. I was for Obama before that was cool in 2008.

Reply to Pastiche423 (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:34 AM

Dec 2015

And I think Sanders is no Obama, which is good since Sanders is an actual progressive.

I predict another presidential run fail for Hillary.

malokvale77

(4,879 posts)

10. The only time I pay attention is when Bernie is on.

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:13 AM

Dec 2015

Everything else is just drivel.

MrMickeysMom

(20,453 posts)

12. Only if that dumbing down thing works...

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:43 AM

Dec 2015

What an insult...

The corporate executives of our illustrious media must be frantic... "Well, SHIT! They're not dumbing down FAST ENOUGH for it to all work!"

Rosa Luxemburg

(28,627 posts)

13. Will they pretend he isn't there when he is elected president?

Reply to LS_Editor (Original post)

Wed Dec 16, 2015, 12:48 AM

Dec 2015

LS_Editor

(893 posts)

14. That would be something.

Reply to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 16, 2015, 02:10 AM

Dec 2015

That I am sure they would be capable of.

Reply to this discussion