After watching todays Trump press conference I would say all White House reporters should be called heroes for the crap they have to deal with.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
NBC Blows It Again
- Thread starter umfan
- Start date
As someone who came close to being killed for investigative journalism, I think I have the credentials to say I was more embarrassed than ever by Jim Acosta's rude behaviour. Not only does he have a habit of hogging the mike... asking multiple questions and taking opportunities away from his colleagues... he asks questions about multiple subjects at the same time and then interrupts the President with further questions.
Ideology and the current wave of conflict politics aside, Acosta is just a bad, narcissistic journalist who lacks respect both for the President and his colleagues.
All of those issues should be dealt with by the President of the White House Correspondents Association, not the President of the US. There is a system for dealing with reporters who hog the mic. The WHCA has a long and very distinguished history. If Acosta was doing things that other reporters found objectionable, they would handle it among themselves. Instead, one of the other reporters stood up for him during the PC, and was himself attacked. Reporters interrupt because this president rambles and repeats himself. In any case, Acosta has been suspended from the White House.
The whole press corp should have walked out of that sham of a conference. It's a disgrace how they allow the president to walk all over them. By not giving him attention he will hopefully smarten up and act like a president instead of a spoiled child who doesn't want to answer the tough questions.
I seriously want to avoid being political here, and since this is indeed an issue about media news coverage I will give a try at a response.
It is reasonably clear that the majority of WH correspondents are not Trump fans. It can be said that in some cases, this is Mr Trump's own fault given his personality. But the fact is that the bulk of the "squad" is of a very different persuasion and many are, hearing their manner of expressing their questions, more antagonistic than inquisitive.
In that environment, it can't be expected that a committee of like-minded persons would find fault in Jim Acosta's performance today. They might even find it commendable given the overwhelming press editorial attitude that the duty of, particularly, the Fifth Estate, is to protect us from our current president. I have not seen similar or comparable group attitudes by the press corps during the presidencies of Obama, Clinton, either Bush or Reagan. In fact, we are seeing straight news articles filled with editorialized adjectives and adverbs, when this should never be the case.
Having done more than a couple of all news stations and talk stations both internationally and in half the top 10 US markets, I can say that we had a policy of not using terms in news stories that conveyed opinion. "Just the facts, Ma'am" was our mantra. Today, I see the opposite: a paucity of fact and an abundance of colored terminology, and that is on both sides of the political spectrum. It's no longer a presentation.
It's not even a debate. it's a cage fight.
And it's a redefinition of journalism. Advocacy journalism, which should be an oxymoron, is the norm.
And it's not "fake news". It is news seen through a colored lens.
A colored lens is not an easy thing for a journalist to prevent or avoid. When I was living in South America, a group of us who were journalists and editorialists would often meet after local or regional events were covered in Time or Newsweek and the discussion often revolved around how the reporters from those magazines saw things so differently than the view that "us locals" saw. We nearly always concluded that the reason for the difference was that the reporters were culturally and educationally seeing things through the lens of their heritage, their society and their beliefs and they could not, often, see some aspects of reality because those facts in evidence were transparent to them.
I debate with myself whether there is a new cultural lens that changes the role of journalism from strict reporting to one of incorporating extreme analysis in that reporting.
Since we are taking the thread down the rat hole. The problem is the cable news talking heads. They are getting paid to come up with content. So they spin the news to fit their agenda. I see the worst culprits at Fox News. Their whole prime time lineup is just there to inflate Trump's ego since he watching them religiously. Yes CNN and MSNBC do it too, but they throw facts into their coverage.
Now you can't fault the media for doing their jobs, reporting on what the president does. Unfortunately what he does is not flattering and sorry Mr President but the truth hurts. He's not used to being in public where his actions have consequences. Sure when he was in Trump Tower saying stupid things and acting like a buffoon it didn't hurt anyone but his investors or his kids. Now the world gets to see how he acts and he doesn't like it when the news reports on it.
Sure all presidents hated the news media but they let it go without taking it personal. Trump is so thin skinned that he takes it personal. This is a problem for a sitting president.
I don't know that there's anything a group of reporters can do that will change anything this president says or does. My view however is they're giving him way too much attention, way too much coverage. He will always find a way to turn anything to his own advantage. They should have learned that by now.
Good point! Agree!
I have to say that I agree about Acosta. I don't think anybody takes a back seat to me in hatred for Trump, and I couldn't give a damn if Acosta "respects" the orange narcissistic sociopath, but IMO, he was out of line. There is such as decorum, and showing respectful behavior whether or not you like the President.
I first read about the encounter on a liberal website, and the headline was something like "Trump off the hook"...."yells at Acosta..." So when I was actually able to watch the clip of the incident, I was surprised to see something quite diferent.
Amen!
Barbra Streisand said it the other evening in an interview on Bill Maher's show: Why is the press giving this president all the coverage and exposure when they already know what he says are outright lies? It is a question I have asked myself countless times.
What is bothersome to me is the apparent desire of The President to engage with Acosta. I truly believe he looks forward to these type of fights for two reasons. First, it revs up his base, and second, it is just his personality. He likes to present his ego over any concerns about how is he being perceived by the public outside his "base", and those around the world. Not the kind of leader I want, but to get back to the subject...yes Acosta is overbearing. He may have a bigger ego than Trump at the end of the day. But Acosta is just a reporter, Trump is the leader of the free world.
That is no longer true.
Good for him. I'll see it in a few minutes.
plus, Dan did get a few jokes in on Pete during the apology and they also had a joke in the form of a ringtone on Dan's phone being a Ariana Grande song (a reference to the short lived relationship between her and Pete).
They did a great job with that and even managed to make it a celebration of Veterans Day.
- Status