Media Tracker (4 Viewers)

[SaintForLife]

I figured we needed a thread specifically about the media.

There was a very big correction recently by the Washington Post.


That story was supposedly "independently confirmed" by CNN, NBC News, USA Today, ABC News, & PBS News Hour. How could they all have gotten the quote wrong if they actually independently confirmed the story?






Why do all the errors always go in one political direction and not closer to 50/50?

 

[SaintForLife]

They might not like those parameters for obvious reasons.

 

[superchuck500]

They might not like those parameters for obvious reasons.

Did ya know that you can search campaign donations? It’s public record.

 

[SaintForLife]

Did ya know that you can search campaign donations? It’s public record.

Yep. I think he meant for the journalist to state his political donations and voting record at the time of the interview.

 

[superchuck500]

Yep. I think he meant for the journalist to state his political donations and voting record at the time of the interview.

I don’t think he was insinuating that. Musk didn’t do that.

I don’t think he knows that campaign donations are public record. Why would he say “let’s open that book” when it’s already open?

 

[MT15]

I don’t think he was insinuating that. Musk didn’t do that.

I don’t think he knows that campaign donations are public record.

Or, alternatively, he actually knows, but saying this the way he did will drive engagement and fuel outrage and make him seem relevant?

 

[SaintForLife]

I don’t think he was insinuating that. Musk didn’t do that.

I don’t think he knows that campaign donations are public record.

I disagree. It was widely known that Musk was supporting Trump especially because of how well known Musk is.

The average person isn't going to know who an ABC reporter donated to or voted for.

 

[superchuck500]

I disagree. It was widely known that Musk was supporting Trump especially because of how well known Musk is.

The average person isn't going to know who an ABC reporter donated to or voted for.

I don’t think voting history is an issue - that’s not public and generally not discussed unless someone volunteers it. Campaign contributions are public.

Anyone who wants to do the work can do it. Just because Musk has chosen to be very public about his sentiments doesn’t mean that everyone has to. If someone else wants to make a journalist’s donation history public, go for it.

 

[MT15]

Also - Chuck, since you’re here.

Are there any legal issues with someone who is supporting a candidate with a PAC, as Musk is, hosting that candidate and doing a public “conversation” with that individual who is running for office?

Isn’t that a direct campaign contribution to Trump?

 

[superchuck500]

Also - Chuck, since you’re here.

Are there any legal issues with someone who is supporting a candidate with a PAC, as Musk is, hosting that candidate and doing a public “conversation” with that individual who is running for office?

Isn’t that a direct campaign contribution to Trump?

As a disclaimer I don’t have any particular experience with campaign finance law but I don’t think that’s a donation unless the host typically charges money to anyone else for that activity.

Technically it was a “spaces” meeting on X - which anyone can set up and host.

 

[MT15]

As a disclaimer I don’t have any particular experience with campaign finance law but I don’t think that’s a donation unless the host typically charges money to anyone else for that activity.

Technically it was a “spaces” meeting on X - which anyone can set up and host.

Thanks, I saw some chatter about it online and I have read that there are some regulations about the ways that PACs operate. I don’t think they are allowed to donate directly to the candidate.

I wonder if the Trump campaign has to consider this an “in-kind” contribution though? It certainly wasn’t “news” in that sense, and it had roughly a million viewers.

 

[CoolBrees]

They might not like those parameters for obvious reasons.

It's public record who gives money. Give me a person and i will tell you who they donated to. How about I will look up Donald Trump......

Well I guess he and I have something in common - we both have donated to Kamala Harris!

Be honest, do you understand how ANY of this works?

I bet there are some patient people here who would be happy to hold your hand and walk you through how a bill is made, what is a campaign contribution is and who can make them, what a PAC is, etc.

Your arguments would be a lot more sound if you weren't arguing with the civic knowledge of a 7th grader

 

[superchuck500]

Thanks, I saw some chatter about it online and I have read that there are some regulations about the ways that PACs operate. I don’t think they are allowed to donate directly to the candidate.

I wonder if the Trump campaign has to consider this an “in-kind” contribution though? It certainly wasn’t “news” in that sense, and it had roughly a million viewers.

I don’t think it is an in-kind contribution because there’s no market product or service being provided. Spaces meetings are free. You could host a Spaces event tomorrow and interview Kamala Harris.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Conservatives are complaining about media bias, as is their wont, especially when Republicans are losing. They are correct that Kamala Harris has enjoyed fairly positive coverage to date.

But their conviction that the media are employing a “double standard” is actually backward. It is Donald Trump who is being held to a lower standard than Harris.

The main indictment of the mainstream media (conservatives always pretend “the media” excludes the large share of Republican-controlled outlets like Fox News) is that Harris has been allowed to skate by without specifying her policy platform. That is true, so far.

Reporters are probably extending the fair assumption that any new candidate will take a bit of time to settle on a platform. If Harris avoids any substantive commitments by September and the media aren’t making a big issue out of it, I’d be surprised.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump very much is skating by without serious policy commitments.

He floated the idea of repealing Obamacare, then backed away, and is continuing to vaguely promise to make health care better for everybody without anybody paying for it.

He has made positive noises about cutting retirement programs without specifying how. He is secretly promising huge tax cuts to wealthy donors, while saying he would “be okay” with setting the corporate tax rate just one point lower.

Trump worked closely with the Heritage Foundation to develop a detailed policy agenda, traveling with the group’s president, Kevin Roberts, and telling an audience, “They’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do.” He now disclaims any relationship to the plan and insists, “Have no idea who is in charge of it.”

The media are reporting on some of these questions, especially about Project 2025. But most of Trump’s issue evasions have disappeared from the news, and the press has had almost no ability to force him to take a stand on any issue he prefers not to talk about. Harris, at least, is supposed to be working on an agenda. Trump won’t get more specific until he wins.

The most important way Trump benefits from a double standard is simply that his violations of democratic and civic norms are so widespread that the media have given up on holding him to anything resembling a customary standard of behavior for a presidential candidate.

A recent example will suffice: Imagine if Harris published a statement alleging that a recent Trump rally attended by thousands of people was actually empty, that the crowd at the rally was faked through artificial intelligence, and that the news media helped perpetuate this gigantic fraud.

Suppose she proceeded to argue that this alleged fakery was a form of “election interference” that disqualified Trump from the ballot.

This would be an existential crisis for Harris. Cable news would break into its programming to cover this and wouldn’t stop until she was driven from the race.

Newspapers would print multiple Watergate-level front-page stories about Harris going stark raving mad and threatening democracy.

Trump did this, of course, and it was a minor story.

The reason isn’t that reporters like Trump or want him to win. The reason is that they haven’t figured out a structural solution to the problem of a candidate whose misconduct, dishonesty, bigotry, and general pathological behavior lie so far beyond the norm.

Trump is a yearslong out-of-sample event that blows up every instrument used to measure him. The media have tried, and failed, to capture his abnormality, but no workable solution has presented itself.............

MSN

The Media’s Double Standard Favors Donald Trump, Not Kamala Harris

Conservative complaints about bias miss the point.

nymag.com

 

[MT15]

So they have now decided to question her religion. In a way I’m sure they never have questioned Trump. (I think she grew up Baptist)

 

[Sendai]

Also - Chuck, since you’re here.

Are there any legal issues with someone who is supporting a candidate with a PAC, as Musk is, hosting that candidate and doing a public “conversation” with that individual who is running for office?

Isn’t that a direct campaign contribution to Trump?

It was a public broadcast so an equal time situation and Musk has made the same offer to Harris.

 

[LA - L.A.]

It was a public broadcast so an equal time situation and Musk has made the same offer to Harris.

Dude, are you trying to break the world record on being wrong about US laws and regulations?

Only television and radio stations that transmit terrestrial based radio waves that anyone can receive for free are broadcast. The internet and cable television are not broadcast.

47 U.S. Code § 315 - Candidates for public office, commonly referred to as the equal time rule, only applies to radio and television broadcasts. It does not apply to cable TV or the internet.

No, political candidates are not guaranteed equal amounts of TV ad time

X does not have to give Kamala Harris a similar live event as it gave to Donald Trump because equal time laws don’t apply to digital platforms.

www.firstcoastnews.com

​

"Another key limitation of the law is that it only applies to broadcast stations and networks, meaning cable television channels like CNN or ESPN and digital platforms such as Hulu or Facebook do not have to abide by these rules."​

The reason there is pornography on the internet is because it's outside of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) authority and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) can't regulate anything outside of the FCC's authority. Cable networks could show porn, and some in fact do, if they want. The content on cable networks are entirely self-determined and self-censored. The FCC and the FEC can't touch them.

Nobody should ever believe anything Sendai says about American laws and regulations, because they're always wrong, like every single time wrong. It's uncanny how they're always wrong.

 

[SaintForLife]

It's public record who gives money. Give me a person and i will tell you who they donated to. How about I will look up Donald Trump......

Well I guess he and I have something in common - we both have donated to Kamala Harris!

Be honest, do you understand how ANY of this works?

I bet there are some patient people here who would be happy to hold your hand and walk you through how a bill is made, what is a campaign contribution is and who can make them, what a PAC is, etc.

Your arguments would be a lot more sound if you weren't arguing with the civic knowledge of a 7th grader

It's just funny that Democrat activists masquerading as journalists are upset that Trump was doing an interview with someone who's supporting him.

 

[efil4]

I bet there are some patient people here who would be happy to hold your hand and walk you through how a bill is made, what is a campaign contribution is and who can make them, what a PAC is, etc.

Your arguments would be a lot more sound if you weren't arguing with the civic knowledge of a 7th grader

someone did. Schoolhouse rock a few pages back- "Im just a bill"