Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumAmy Goodman with Great Bullet Points talks about the Mainstream Corporate Media & 2016 Election!
Published on Apr 28, 2016
Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! tells us about Trump-land and how the media is ruining this election.
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)A courageous, truth teller. One of only a handful in the news business.
Thanks for posting, KoKo!
Uncle Joe
(58,596 posts)Thanks for the thread, KoKo.
Triana
(22,666 posts)tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)BadGimp
(4,024 posts)But no one is listening. The take over of the 4th estate is complete. Next up, the Democratic Party.
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)Needs to be seen by everyone...
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Way to go, Amy!
Thank you, KoKo!
zentrum
(9,866 posts)certainot
(9,090 posts)and how bernie can get a lot more notice.
what media and political analysts are missing is this:
at a cheap $1000/hr x 15hrs/day x 1200 stations, rw talk radio is worth 4.68 BIL$/ year or 390MIL$ /month FREE for coordinated global warming denial, pro republican wall st think tank propaganda, free market deregulation bullshit, swiftboating, and the hate and fear used to get people to vote republican.
trump is getting covered because every assinine dumbass thing he says has already been pounded into the earholes of 50 mil a week for 25 years. that is the only reason he is now 'acceptable' to the msm as presidential material. without those years of UNCHALLENGED groundwork repetition from limbaugh and sons the guy wouldn't have made it past the first few rounds of primaries.
his success is a reflection of the poor state and corporate bent of the political media but they are shunning bernie they way they would have anyway - he's the 'radical' lefty.
bernie is not 'acceptable' because the country has been baked for 25 years with $390mil/month worth of fascist anti-liberal lying and buzz from 1200 radio stations.
the the corporate media always favors the corporate establishment republican candidate. they are sniffing trump's ass because the talk radio gods and the teabag base they have controlled for 25 years has rebelled and rejected the other candidates and he is more outrageous than anything that's come along in decades. the other candidates were pitiful and a few were maybe slightly more acceptable for the white house.
if bernie voters want to get him media notice they ought to protest these 90 universities that endorse 270 limbaugh/trump stations - the campus discussion on whether the school should look for alternatives will scare the crap out of the GOP and they'll howl FREE SPEECH!!!
that will get media coverage and advertisers will drop rw radio all over the country. media and politicians and their operatives will be much more careful about repeating bullshit laundered through limbaugh and spwn. the rw radio monopoly as a nearly unified PSYOPS will fall apart.
dems will get supermajorities. bernie would be able to get a lot more done without the obstruction that plagued one of the best presidents in our history.
without rw radio intimidating and enabling the rest of the MSM and our reps the country will move 20p pts to the left and the sanders and warrens and wellstones will become the norm rather than the exception.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)She starts by criticizing all the coverage the media has given Trump, ends with saying that the media should be critical, and doesn't apparently understand that most of the media's coverage of Trump has been tabloid-esque, "Can you believe he said that?!?" negative coverage. Exactly what she's been calling for.
And she cherry picks statistics. Sanders has had more face time on the Sunday political talk shows than any other candidate in the race. And his coverage has been the most positive in the entire race from the media. So this whole thing falls apart, and comes off to anyone not already a Sanders supporter as a well-produced (with piano music) political whine.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
20score
(4,769 posts)I seriously doubt that you know where to find a map to reality, never mind how to read one.
You actually said, "The media coverage of Trump has been tabloid-esque.....Exactly what she's been calling for."
Swing and a miss! What you said is so far off base, so far from what Amy Goodman thinks about the media, it would take years to catch you up.
If you're going to be arrogant, you owe it to others to know what you're talking about. You don't.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)She starts by complaining that Trump is getting too much coverage. Okay. Granted.
She ends by complaining that the media isn't being critical. Really?!?
Trump's coverage is the most negative of all the candidates except for Hillary. Hillary, being the Democrat most likely to win, absolutely receives the greatest smearing in the media. But that's just par for the course.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/04/15/media-analysis-shows-hillary-clinton-has-received-most-negative-stories-least-positive-stories-all/209945
Now admittedly, he also received more positive coverage as well. Not as much as Kasich.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
/ I'm used to inane dumb-shit insults on the DU, so you'll have to try harder to penetrate my thick skin. But try to actually say something next time, rather than just vituperation.
20score
(4,769 posts)All criticism is not created equal. She wants substance, real issues and problems addressed like there are adults listening. What we get is sixth grade bullshit that people could listen to for weeks on end and learn nothing.
From what you've written, it seems you really don't understand the difference between information and infotainment and propaganda.
I'm done with you. I don't really believe you're as stupid as you come across, this ignorance is willful.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)It's just that the "point" is utterly at odds with actual facts:
* Sanders has received quite a bit of media coverage, the most positive other than Kasich. Trump has received the highest negative coverage, other than Clinton.
* The media is covering Trump not due to some nutcase-conspiracy theory of shoving him down our throat, but instead because every time they do, their ratings go up. There is an audience for Trump, and the media sells audiences to advertisers, period. The public likes to watch Trump, apparently. No clue why myself, but they do.
* TV is entertainment. At best, it can have information worked in along with it, becoming infotainment. But people don't watch TV to study. And documentaries do spectacularly poorly on TV. So again, the entire idea that this is being forced on people is laughably stupid. Yes, you can call this "sixth grade bullshit", but that's all most people watching TV want.
These are just basic facts entirely deconstructing this rather trite "why isn't TV smarter?" whine, which is so old, it sounds like it comes from the 1950s. None of your swearing changes how hackneyed complaining about public tastes is. TV is intended to reach as much of a mass market as possible, period.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
mhatrw
(10,786 posts)then I'm going to let you in on a little secret.
24/7 tabloid-esque "Can you believe he said that?!?" is not the kind of news or criticism that facilitates a vibrant democracy.
And your Sunday morning stats are the ones that are cherry picked. The overall picture is exactly as Goodman portrayed it.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Because no one likes those mean, nasty Republican bombs. Give me a gdmn BREAK!