Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Snow on Thursday December 01 2016, @06:34AM   Printer-friendly
from the head-in-the-sand dept.

Just before the dawn of the Trump administration, journalism in Washington, DC, faces an existential crisis -- but virtually no one in the profession is willing to diagnose it.

Here it is: For the first time, words don't matter. In August, as a guest on MSNBC's Meet the Press Daily, I noted that voters take Donald Trump seriously but not literally, while journalists take him literally, but not seriously.

[...] And journalists keep falling for it because they, like politicians, over-value words -- and they are now covering a politician who does not. President-elect Trump still takes the same cavalier approach to verbal description as he would in hawking a condo tower that's yet to be designed. And more than enough voters don't seem to mind. Trump has spent a career interacting with journalists, but as the first president never to serve in the military, the cabinet, or another public office before his election to the White House, he's never been immersed in the word culture that drives political journalism. [...] Most recently, when Trump announced he had chosen South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley to be his ambassador to the United Nations, journalists raced to re-tweet a March rant from Trump in which he said the people of South Carolina should be embarrassed by her.

[...] Writing endless columns on this or that flip-flop based on Trump's conflicting rhetoric is wasting the time of the readers and viewers who have decided that's not what matters with this particular President-elect. [...] If the press covers Trump the way it covered prior presidents -- too literally -- it may find its own customers take journalism itself a lot less seriously.

Source: CNN


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @06:49AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01 2016, @06:49AM (#435304)

    We begin bombing in five minutes.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday December 01 2016, @03:19PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 01 2016, @03:19PM (#435453) Journal

    After January, such a thing will never be said by Our Dear Leader.

    It will be tweeted instead.

    Idea: incoming administration should modernize nuclear launch system for the 21st century so it is possible to give launch orders via Twitter.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by jmorris on Thursday December 01 2016, @04:13PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Thursday December 01 2016, @04:13PM (#435490)

    You re probably too old to know better. That line was a mic check, it was clearly intended as a joke in that everyone laughed, loudly and without any of the nervous "was that a joke" sort of hesitation. Was he ALSO intending to send the Soviets a message as subtext, that he wasn't going to be terrified of them? Perhaps, but the simple joke explanation is clearly sufficient so a conspiracy theory is not needed, we can instead just say that Reagan was joking about it because he in fact was NOT terrified of them.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday December 02 2016, @02:42PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 02 2016, @02:42PM (#435940) Journal

      Everyone. EVERYONE knows it was intended as humor.

      What seems to escape some people is that it is unthinkably inappropriate for someone in Regan's position to say such a thing. If a private citizen said it would be different.

      The office he held at the time completely changes the context of things like that which he says.

      THAT is the issue. And it is one of importance. Not something trivial to brush off. And I would be saying this no matter which party's guy had said it. If a democrat said it, it would be no less inappropriate.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Friday December 02 2016, @04:34PM

        by jmorris (4844) on Friday December 02 2016, @04:34PM (#436017)

        Go watch the full incident, I'm sure YouTube has it. Part of Reagan's secret of success was breaking all of those "that just isn't done" bullcrap rules while knowing where the real line was. We know Trump shares the first, if he can also exhibit the second the next four years will be awesome.

        The people bitching about "that just isn't done, harumph" are almost always just trying to control you by controlling the Narrative and your range of action. The same people saying that at the time were also the same asshole secret commies (and comsyps) who would patiently explain that defeating the Soviet Union was simply "not possible" and besides "everyone" knew Socialism was the future anyhow; that it was just holdout regressive people like Reagan who couldn't accept that and we were all just playing a delicate balancing act of trying to keep them from destroying the world before they all died out and the world could get on to the Sunny Uplands.

        Reagan won, they lost. But Reagan still failed because while focusing on the Enemy abroad he took his eye off the Enemy within. Let us pray Trump does not make that mistake, and his relentless attacks on the Enemy media operations gives hopeful hints.

        • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday December 02 2016, @06:08PM

          by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 02 2016, @06:08PM (#436076) Journal

          I've seen the clip.

          My complaint isn't about Regan. Or that he won. Or about any kind of politics. Please don't bring that into it.

          Some rules are not bullcrap rules. Someone with the wisdom Regan should have at his age, should know that something he says can put another nuclear power on alert.

          There is no good way to spin this or dance around it. The stakes are high. Misunderstandings can happen. Humor can be lost in translation to another language. Or even merely typed as text and read back where you lose tone of voice, etc.

          And I'm not picking on Regan. I would have the same things to say no matter who did that. It really should not be done. Someone in that position should take it quite seriously. It's not that you cannot have any humor in your life. But consider where you are at the moment.

          --
          People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.