Sunday, September 18, 2016

Print Media Starting to Ditch Both Sides Do it Journalism

With all the apologetics some in the Beltway went into in the face of criticism of false equivalence, the print media seems to be catching on.

A lot of time, it's just about tweaking headlines a little-just adding a single word. The Washington Post, the NY Times, even the AP have been doing it since Trump's birther infomercial.

This piece by Politico shows how the media is trying actual journalism on for size-rather than simply being a court stenographer"

"Trump distorts Clinton's immigration position in pitch to grieving families."

Read more: 

Now Lawrence O'Donnell still thinks Politico should have used the word 'lie' as the Washington Post and NY Times have started doing. 

".@politico Distorts? If you aren't comfortable calling a lie a lie, I don't know how you can cover @realDonaldTrump campaign."

Indeed. But I'll take distort. I mean compared to before where Trump would lie and the headline would simply repeat the lie without comment.

'Hillary calls Trump a birther and he responds she's the birther.'

That isn't journalism it's stenography and it leaves the reader free to believe whatever he or she wants to believe. 'Hillary and Trump disagree on the shape of the earth.'

Meanwhile, the NY Times is back in the journalism business in a big way.

In the past when the Beltway answered media critics it was always like Chris Cillizza does here.

But Cillizza, just like the NY Times editor Liz Spayd and I saw in a conversation I had with USA Today's Paul Singer on Twitter, completely misses the point on Trump's coverage. They don't get the difference between reporting on a particular fact and investigating it.

"And, again, when it comes to your references to Bannon and others: We wrote all about Bannon’s background and his controversial statements. That it didn’t change people’s minds about Trump isn’t really the media’s responsibility. We just don’t have that power."

Reporting something he says is different than doing an investigative piece that looks more deeply into it. It's the difference between stenography and journalism.

Like this NY Times piece out on all the tax credits Trump has taken over the years. This is what journalism looks like as Cillizza appears not to know.

"A Trump Empire Built on Inside Connections and $885 Million in Tax Breaks"

Now the proof is whether this continues. There is so much for investigative journalists to chew on, learn, and reveal to the public. There should be many more pieces like this about Trump's business interests, financial ties, his taxes-as he won't show us the returns.

Keep hitting him on releasing them. Start now, and don't stop.

Do lots of pieces speculating on the possible reasons why he won't.

Good start but let's see if the media keeps its eye on the ball.

No comments:

Post a Comment