Columbia Journalism Review: The Press Versus The President (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    5,224
    Reaction score
    2,486
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    Looking back on the coverage of Trump

    Seven and a half years ago, journalism began a tortured dance with Donald Trump, the man who would be the country’s forty-fifth president—first dismissing him, then embracing him as a source of ratings and clicks, then going all in on efforts to catalogue Trump as a threat to the country (also a great source of ratings and clicks).

    No narrative did more to shape Trump’s relations with the press than Russiagate. The story, which included the Steele dossier and the Mueller report among other totemic moments, resulted in Pulitzer Prizes as well as embarrassing retractions and damaged careers. For Trump, the press’s pursuit of the Russia story convinced him that any sort of normal relationship with the press was impossible.

    For the past year and a half, CJR has been examining the American media’s coverage of Trump and Russia in granular detail, and what it means as the country enters a new political cycle. Investigative reporter Jeff Gerth interviewed dozens of people at the center of the story—editors and reporters, Trump himself, and others in his orbit.

    The result is an encyclopedic look at one of the most consequential moments in American media history. Gerth’s findings aren’t always flattering, either for the press or for Trump and his team. Doubtless they’ll be debated and maybe even used as ammunition in the ongoing media war being waged in the country. But they are important, and worthy of deep reflection as the campaign for the presidency is about, once again, to begin.

    Jeff Gerth is a freelance journalist who spent three decades as an investigative reporter at the New York Times.








     
    You cant be serious. You are posting an article from the guy who was the first reporter pushing the BS Steele dossier? 🙄

    Are you not aware that the Steele Dossier was complete BS and one of the sources was long time Clinton Operative Charles Dolan?
    I think you've fallen for this:

    "Gerth finds plenty of ammo for his assault on the media. But here’s where he goes wrong: He misrepresents the scandal that is the subject of the media coverage he is scrutinizing. He defines the Trump-Russia affair by only two elements of the tale: the question of Trump collusion with Moscow and the unconfirmed Steele dossier. This is exactly how Trump and his lieutenants want the scandal to be perceived."

    https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ism-review-jeff-gerth-trump-russia-the-media/

    ========================================

    But the real problem was:

    " the basics of the scandal: Vladimir Putin attacked the 2016 election in part to help Trump win, and Trump and his aides aided and abetted this assault on American democracy by denying such an attack was happening. Trump provided cover for a foreign adversary subverting a US election."

    https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ism-review-jeff-gerth-trump-russia-the-media/
     
    Last edited:
    Good points. And at some point, you just have to grapple with the fact that some fairly prominent “journalists” have carried the Trump/Putin narrative forward for years. This despite all the completely logical arguments against this narrative, and the facts found by Durham and others.

    Yet, people still follow said “journalists” even though they have proven themselves to be mere propagandists and undeserving of the designation of journalist. Easier to fool someone than convince them they’ve been fooled.
     
    I think you've fallen for this:

    "Gerth finds plenty of ammo for his assault on the media. But here’s where he goes wrong: He misrepresents the scandal that is the subject of the media coverage he is scrutinizing. He defines the Trump-Russia affair by only two elements of the tale: the question of Trump collusion with Moscow and the unconfirmed Steele dossier. This is exactly how Trump and his lieutenants want the scandal to be perceived."

    https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ism-review-jeff-gerth-trump-russia-the-media/

    ========================================

    But the real problem was:

    " the basics of the scandal: Vladimir Putin attacked the 2016 election in part to help Trump win, and Trump and his aides aided and abetted this assault on American democracy by denying such an attack was happening. Trump provided cover for a foreign adversary subverting a US election."

    https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ism-review-jeff-gerth-trump-russia-the-media/

    The easiest counter to this is what was MSNBC covering for 4 years while Trump was in office? Was it primarly Trumps collusion with Moscow, and the unconfirmed Steele dossier? You can't have it both ways. You can't primarily talk about this on tv for 4 years, and when rebuffed. You fallback on "countering my main talking points is falling for conservative propanganda."

    TL/DR Who was the lemming who fell for narrowly defining Trump's Russian collusion? It was you.
     
    The easiest counter to this is what was MSNBC covering for 4 years while Trump was in office? Was it primarly Trumps collusion with Moscow, and the unconfirmed Steele dossier? You can't have it both ways. You can't primarily talk about this on tv for 4 years, and when rebuffed. You fallback on "countering my main talking points is falling for conservative propanganda."

    TL/DR Who was the lemming who fell for narrowly defining Trump's Russian collusion? It was you.
    I don’t think the dossier was covered very much by MSNBC and even if it was - is that the only source of news that counts? There is a whole lot of coverage in the US from every sort of angle. Trump had so many gaffes and outrageous statements and actions to cover, the spent very little time of the dossier.

    What I mean is this: every time the dossier was brought up - and it really wasn’t talked about that much on MSNBC since you seem to be fixated on them - it was discussed as mostly of unknown veracity. They disclaimed it every time it was brought up.

    The dossier was seized upon by conservative outlets (and the weird subset of faux journalists who carry Putin’s water) as a convenient thing to harp upon. They love that it was covered at all, and they love to pretend it was responsible for the investigation into Trump. Of course that isn’t true, Trump himself and his crazy band of misfits who aggregated around him are responsible. They talked and acted crazy and brought the attention of the FBI on themselves.

    Why do these faux journalists and right wing outlets want to focus on the dossier so much? Easy to figure out if you want to distract from the words and actions of Trump and his cohorts as well as distract from Putin’s actions.
     

    One answer to why some left-leaning folks support an authoritarian regime in Russia.

    In 2017, with Trump in the White House, Russian and Republican denial operations began, challenging the Russian role and further widening divisions in America. A pinnacle of these operations was the publication in The Nation on 9 August 2017 of an article – still online under a new editor – claiming that the stolen emails were leaked from inside the DNC.
    When I was shown the Nation article later that year by one of the experts it cited, I concluded that it was technical nonsense, based on nothing.
    I traced the source of the leak claim to a group of mainly American young right-wing activists delivering heavy pro-Russian and pro-Syrian messaging, working with a British collaborator. Their leader, William Craddick, had boasted of creating the ‘Pizzagate’ conspiracy story – a fantasy that Hillary Clinton and her election staff ran a child sex and torture ring in the non-existent basement of a pleasant Washington neighbourhood pizzeria. Their enterprise had clear information channels from Moscow.
    When I called Daily Beast writer Casey Michel for guidance, he told me “I can’t think of any other mainstream outlets on the left that followed the lines of The Nation” other than isolated journalists and bloggers. The report then said that “some on the left – including journalists – have joined Trump supporters and the GOP in pushing pro-Putin information and theories”.

    They hired Aaron Maté!!!

    • Pope struck out the passage describing how Cohen and vanden Heuvel had travelled to Moscow in 2009 to receive Russia’s Order of Friendship award from Foreign Minister Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov. He removed references to vanden Heuvel then appearing on Russian outlet RT.
    In the series, writer Jeff Gerth condemns multiple Pulitzer Prize-winning reports on Russian interference operations by US mainstream newspapers. Echoing words used in 2020 by vanden Heuvel, he cited as more important “RealClearInvestigations, a non-profit online news site that has featured articles critical of the Russia coverage by writers of varying political orientation, including Aaron Maté”.
    As with The Nation in 2017, the CJR is seeing a storm of derisive and critical evaluations of the series by senior American journalists. More assessments are said to be in the pipeline. “We’re taking the critiques seriously,” Pope said this week. The Columbia Journalism Review may now have a Russia Problem.
     
    If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it may indeed be … a conduit for Putin, lol.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom