↓
 
Home » On the media and Russiagate

On the media and Russiagate

The New Neo Posted on by

I ordinarily get my news by reading. That’s not just a result of the internet or of my political change; it’s something that’s always been true of me. I’ve always found TV news to be too shallow, and I prefer reading in general anyway.

What’s even more curious was that I have always had a certain dyslexia for news personalities. Walter Cronkite and Huntley and Brinkley were practically the only TV newspeople I could have identified in my youth, and I couldn’t have told you what network any of them were on. And that was back in the days when it was quite a simple thing to do, because there were really only three choices: ABC, NBC, and CBS. But that tells you how little I cared about network news.

These days, with the proliferation of stations as well as the swelling of coverage hours to fit an all-news-all-the-time cycle, it’s even more complicated and difficult to know all the personalities, but I don’t make much of an effort.

All that of that is a lead-in to the fact that, during the Trump administration and the years of Russiagate coverage, I haven’t watched much TV news at all. Therefore I saw only a smidgen of the constant barrage of over-the-top accusations on stations such as MSNBC (Rachel Maddow in particular) or CNN.

Oh, I read quite a bit about the sensationalist TV news coverage itself, and sometimes I watched a small video clip. But I certainly had no desire to follow the TV news in real time because the little I did see made me cringe. I left it to others for the most part to cover the TV coverage.

It turns out that it was even worse—even more vicious and unremitting and mendacious—than I’d thought, and I’d already thought it contained plenty of all those ingredients.

And it also turns out that the coverage by some of these stations is one of the main reasons that viewers have been so completely gobsmacked by the findings of the Mueller report. Again, that’s something I expected to happen, but the extent and depth of it has somewhat surprised me.

It was fun for the MSM while it lasted. And it swelled their ratings to a phenomenal extent. They are now trying pivot to other related aspects of Trump’s supposed perfidy, and are refusing (as far as I can tell) to acknowledge any wrongdoing or error on their part that isn’t somehow Trump’s and/or the Republicans’ fault. I wonder if the newspeople even can admit error to themselves. I doubt it.

If you’ve read my change story you’re aware that a great deal of it was fueled by my late-in-the-game perception that the MSM had been lying to me for a long long time. Once a person realizes that, there’s usually no turning back. The trust is broken and that’s that, and the person is open to reading (or viewing) other things and other news sources with a critical and skeptical eye and evaluating each story on its own merits.

I wonder whether the MSM ever thought their coverage ultimately ran the risk of losing them viewers. I also wonder whether they believed their own tales that the Mueller report was bound to find that Trump had colluded with Russia. Ordinarily I think they’re well aware of when they are lying, but in this particular instance my guess is that a lot of them actually believed these particular lies. Wishful thinking played some part in it, and of course the collusion story drove ratings. But I think the press, or at least some significant percentage of people in the press, believed their informants who, after all, were supposedly privy to inside information on this matter.

Adam Schiff, for example, was lying through his teeth, brazenly and with a straight face and with full knowledge of the falsehood of what he was saying because there was nothing in the briefings that backs up his stories. I am sure there were other people like Schiff feeding the press scoops; he was just the most visible and vocal one of them dishing the dirt. And no doubt there were “authorities” in the FBI or the DOJ or people with close connections to those institutions who were also blabbing to the press and feeding them outright lies in order to sway the public.

If so, then many people in the press might be feeling somewhat duped and betrayed as well. Of course, they won’t let it stop them from going on and on and on this way. But over time it may make it harder for them to trust their sources and report with conviction on what they’re being told.

[ADDENDUM: Ace points out that, even now, no one in the MSM seems to be calling Schiff a liar. That does indicate that most of them probably knew he was lying all along, which certainly would not surprise me although I’m not totally sure it’s the case. It’s possible, for example, that they can’t accuse Schiff of lying now, even though they didn’t know it at the time, because (a) it would make them look like fools and dupes, and (b) it would help the right too much.

This is the old “knaves vs. fools” question, and as usual, you can’t go wrong if you answer “both.”]

Comments

On the media and Russiagate — 28 Comments

  1. I have observed a couple of variants of wishful or magical thinking to be very strong among my lefty former friends:

    1) Belief in something makes it true. Or … believing that something is true is more important than whether it actually is true.
    2) Things that “should” be true, are.

  2. The MSM is not in the business of reporting truths about the state of the world.

    They tell stories about the state of things that are meant to engage their viewers interest. If the viewers remain interested they keep on watching and continue to be exposed to the MSM’s advertisers.

    Prior to the coming of Trump, CNN spent many months covering the disappearance of the Malaysian airliner (as bootless an enterprise as Russiagate but far less pernicious). To watch CNN or MSNBC is to suspend one’s own capability for critical thought. The networks provide their own critiques through the opinions of fakers like Jeffrey Toobin and Malcolm Nance.

    The Left Nexus = MSM/Dems/Hollywood/Academia. Of that quartet, the one worth saving is our universities – There’s still some critical thinking going on there – but, of course, it’s under great assault.

  3. Feelings trumps verifiable facts, wishful ‘thinking’ trumps reality and history for the LIVs. The hands that direct the puppets are still busy pulling the strings behind the curtain obscured by smoke and mirrors. The msm and the Obama-Clinton conspirators that orchestrated the Russia Russia Russia!! insurrection knew exactly what they were doing. Even people like Maddow and Cooper knew they were involved in a conspiracy to overthrow the results of an election. Otherwise, they are dumber than they appear when spouting the talking points.

    This is the biggest (YUGE) political scandal in American history.

  4. Knaves… one and all. It takes willful blindness to be so completely wrong. There has been a deluge of factual rebuttal on the right, to ignore it so cavalierly is to demonstrate a complete indifference to the truth. Only ideological fanaticism and the deepest of hate can account for that degree of willful blindness.

  5. National TV news is just not very useful, to anybody.

    Folks who watched CNN or MSNBC obsessively and got used by the liars on those networks for ratings and profits … you were kinda asking for it. TV news manipulates and exploits the viewers as part of the business model. The model assumes the viewer is lazy and wants a cartoon-ish version of reality spoon-fed to them. Is that you? Don’t do that to yourself.

    It takes time, effort, and determination to learn anything worth knowing. Your TV is not going to help very much in that department.

  6. Over at Powerline, this article caught my eye;

    “A PRIMER IN “VENTRILOQUIST JOURNALISM”

    “Scott’s two posts on his and Victor Davis Hanson’s treatment by The New Yorker calls to mind one of the first and most important lessons I learned from my mentor in journalism, the great M. Stanton Evans. Most “mainstream” journalists are not merely biased, but have a narrative story line in mind when they begin “reporting,” so that when they call you on the phone, they aren’t looking for actual information and perspective—they are looking for a specific quote to drop in their story that fits their narrative. The point is: when you deal with the media, it is not just their innate liberalism you need to be on guard for—you need to keep in mind that they already have their story written.”

  7. I do think there are assorted obvious and unobvious ‘breaks’ that can arise, to ‘knock’ the MSM out of their current rut & fixation on Trump The Bad.

    The Democrats could win in 2020 (they could). Obviously, the imperative to spin bad press about him & his then goes away … and they move on to anything else.

    Or, Trump could win; or win strong, or stomp their guts out, in 2020. Even the simplest, not-impressive win does them big damage. (Especially if the House returns to the GOP.) For Trump to win walking away with a cushion of several percent, an everyday political outcome, will at this point functionally incapacity the MSM.

    Not only that, but the Media then become the GOAT, like Hillary & Bernie both became, to different factions, in 2016. There will be Leftie & Democrat ANGER, at the MSM.

    If Trump wins by a LARGE cushion of points, or ‘God forbid’ is close enough for him to go around emitting the word LANDSLIDE for the duration, what you have then is the Deplorables – “That’s Mr. or Mrs. or Miss Deplorable, thank you kindly!” – wearing purple. And not only be the New Cool, but sportin’ them sexy red MAGA hats, all the time, everywhere.

    Could it happen? I think he’s “aiming”. And I think his years with the Apprentice honed his instinct for what will work, and what won’t. Perhaps most important, almost every spasmodic gyration that the media launches into, is actually them chocking-down some baited treble-hook Trump has dangled for them, hook, line & sinker.

    Always wait for the Fat Lady to sing. Never “know” you got this one in the bag. It’s one step and one day at a time, all the way down the line. But yes, that’s the plan, it’s good script, and it’s just execute, execute, execute.

    Two years from now, Media derangement syndrome can be a rapidly fading memory.

  8. I’m struck by how vague this post is. If you can’t find a quote from Adam Schiff that is false, how do you expect the MSM to find one?

    Schiff referenced a number of specifics that he considers evidence of collusion. Which one is false?

  9. The MSM and Manju recognizing truth and knowing if from falsity? That’s a hoot.

    They have their “truths” that they speak to “power” except when the power is a progressive, or socialist, or even a Democrat. Manju, why not read the Quilette post about Noam Chomsky, his half truths tendencies most recently exemplified about Venezuela, and then get back to us about what falsity and truth are.

    It’s also funny that even Mueller couldn’t find evidence of collusion but Schiff still can? You are a funny guy, bless your heart.

  11. Manju:

    The money quote from the head of CNN was that they (CNN) aren’t investigators they are journalists. They don’t look for truth or weed out falsity; they report, you’ve decided.

  12. So whipers from Comey, Brennan, Clapper, and the usual unnamed sources are “a number of specifics”? Has Schiff devulged the names of these sources? No, of course not. I or anyone could allege unnamed sources that insist the messiah regularly visits the local planned parenthood butcher to obtain baby parts to barbecue. So what? That does make these allegations factual or specific? Sheesh.

  13. “[the press] believed their informants who, after all, were supposedly privy to inside information on this matter.”

    Inside information on what? The truth or facts? They really couldn’t care less. What they want is inside information on the grand strategy (from the grandmasters) for complete political dominance.

    They know they probably won’t get that, so they settle for their little piece of the subordinate strategy. They get their little narrative that supports the little lies that in turn support the big lies and the grand strategy.

    In their eyes and world view, only a fool would refuse to be a knave.

  15. To clarify my point on lies and knaves, I think many in the press either don’t think an objective truth exists, or that so called “truths” are tools used by the powerful to remain in power. Some of them see themselves as foot soldiers in the revolution that will take us to a higher morality. They think: Should society expect them to struggle with resolving the ambiguities of various “truths?”

  16. TommyJay,

    “Some of them see thenselves..” ok, I see myself as absolute, doubt my word and you are dead after torture beyond your imagination, surpreme dictator. I hence forth proclaim the sky is green and the grass is orange. If you give them 1/2024 of an inch they take more than a mile. So we do not buy into their insane narrative.

  17. Long comment by R C on the topic here.

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2019/03/28/there-is-no-pravda-in-izvestiya-the-left-probably-thought-that-controlling-the-media-was-a-victory/#comment-2429032

    “So television news personalities are the galley-slaves in a half-sunk vessel still madly rowing, not realizing all the passengers under 60 have disembarked.”

    FWIW, I’m over 60, but gave up listening to network news and reading the papes when I was in my 20s – I just didn’t have blogs to obsess over until this century.

  19. The media made the classic mistake of believing their own propaganda. They have no one to blame but themselves.

    Yet, somehow, the MSM will blame President Trump for their failures.

  21. Schiff referenced a number of specifics that he considers evidence of collusion. Which one is false?

    All of them and none were specific.

  23. It seems that Schiff—and the MSM, generally—firmly believes the adage, albeit charming, that “It ain’t lying if you believe it!”

    (Well, charming if you’re a four year old.)

    Smollett, too, of course. Though Smollett can “go historical” on us and claim that even if his “excellent adventure” was fake it’s accurate—illustrating, as it does(!) the age-old problems of race in America. (But no mention, please, of any improvements in that realm.) So America is to blame.

    And of course, Trump…. ‘Nuff said!

    Yes, the hydra-headed Narrative (TM) is still alive and kicking; and will thrive for the foreseeable future as the claims against Trump become even more unhinged, as if that were possible. (Yes, it’s possible. More that that, it will happen.)

    Because the stakes are too high—and face it, lying is OK as long as you’re lying for the right cause.

    And “The best defense is an unstoppable offense.”

    To be sure, Brennan “fell off the wagon” in a moment of uncertainty (and shame, perhaps…? Sorry, bad joke—it was probably fear); but I expect he’ll climb right back on and start fulminating as grandly as ever.

    Because lying for “the Revolution” is legit. Is TRUTH!

    Because lying by the “resistance” is just another way to stick it to the deplorables—and their despicable leader.

    Because the Narrative (TM) uber alles.

    Because POWER.

  24. There WAS a time to let bygones be bygones, and Trump took it. After the election, which he won partly by NeverHillary folk like me hearing him promise “Lock her up”, after he won, he said he didn’t want to lock her up.
    Promise broken.
    Trump was letting the DOJ/FBI Clinton cover-up be a bygone.

    BUT – the deep state (and Hillary? and Obama? ) didn’t stop.

    So, now it’s time to defend the “rule of law” — meaning the Dems obey the same rules as the Reps, and get investigated & tried for the same crimes.
    Big difference is that the Reps are innocent (or else the Dem media would have previously found out), but the Dems are guilty ( since they have Dem media protection, and the court of public opinion usually rules).

    This is not a matter of vengeance. It is a matter of preserving the central core of our democratic republic, which turns on the integrity of our elections. Roger Kimball

    We need a special prosecutor to investigate the Clinton email crimes, the cover-up/ destruction of evidence crimes, and the associated crimes.

    America would be stronger, longer, if 100 or more guilty deep state criminals get tried.

    “Lock Them Up” — I read that there was that chant at the rally.
    Justice loving Americans demand that, and deserve it.

  25. Tuvea on March 30, 2019 at 9:37 am at 9:37 am said:
    …
    Yet, somehow, the MSM will blame President Trump for their failures.
    * *
    “The devil made me do it.”

  26. Tom Grey on March 30, 2019 at 6:50 pm at 6:50 pm said:
    There WAS a time to let bygones be bygones, and Trump took it. After the election, which he won partly by NeverHillary folk like me hearing him promise “Lock her up”, after he won, he said he didn’t want to lock her up.
    Promise broken.
    Trump was letting the DOJ/FBI Clinton cover-up be a bygone.

    BUT – the deep state (and Hillary? and Obama? ) didn’t stop.
    * * *
    This has a lot of semblance to the position of the Palestinians, who have rejected scores of generous peace proposals from Israel because they will settle for nothing less than the total destruction of the Jewish state.
    The Democrats support the Palestinians; they generally did before, now do without reservation.

    Same mindset for both situations.

  27. From part of a comment (slightly edited) that I just left at

    https://www.thenewneo.com/2019/03/30/the-soft-coup-killing-a-king/#comment-2429218 :

    If the United States stands for anything beyond what has been called “the law of the jungle,” then we MUST live by the principles of Justice and Benevolence. (Neither of which is to be conflated with something called “Social Justice,” however interpreted; nor with forced “Charity,” which is an expression of rule by fear and manipulated emotional reactions, neither of which has anything to do with Benevolence.)

    And by the way, “Compassion” is meaningless without Justice.

    “Justice must be done, and it must be SEEN to have been done.”

    Otherwise, status + clout + $ can be counted on to get you off the hook, and we Americans — regardless of political position — will lose a bit more respect for the law, for our legal system, for our government, and for our nation.

    Does anyone think that Hillary Clinton has the slightest respect for any of these things?

    .

    Pres. Trump said, fairly soon after he took office, that he thought it best not to indict Hillary. (I presume this was on the grounds of “it would tear the country apart” — which was Nixon’s excuse for not challenging the results of the 1960 election. This was the line being pushed by most right-ish and conservative commentators, advisors, and pundits at the time.)

    But on Hannity, in the last week or two IIRC, the President said that he no longer holds that view.

    Good for him!

    (And I’m no different from anybody else. In a way the prospect is very scary if he does that. But is the prospect of giving in to corruption and the rule by gangsters less frightening? But he will need the strongest possible backing by the Republicans and a vocal and well-informed base in order to succeed.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑