+3 votes
114 views
in News & Informations ⌨ by

Nearly every day for the past week or so, I have noticed that ABC radio news in its 5-minute summary has a 20 or 30-second item informing us that former FBI directory Comey will be testifying this week in Congress.

NEVER does ABC news fail to mention that Trump fired Comey while Comey was heading an investigation of possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russians.

ABC does not claim there was any connection between the firing and the investigation.  ABC simply mentions it, time after time.

The purpose of this is clear, in my opinion.  It is to subliminally plant in listeners' minds the notion that there necessarily WAS a connection between the firing and the investigation.

2 Answers

+3 votes
by

Dear O'Tink,

I started to answer this last night...but hesitated because I also am mostly disapproving of Trump...

However I think yes, the news does purposely dis Trump...but in this case, might it be true that Trump himself eventually acknowledged that one major reason for the firing was Comey's handling of the Russian investigation? 

However the article in which I read THAT was also negative of Trump...

* * *

I don't have a good alternative here; we as a nation do need to maneuver this difficult time as well as possible, and overall, the media is NOT helping. However, I do recall that during the primaries no matter what the media said about Trump his supporters would never believe it.

So one possibility; could the media bias backfire on them again? I can tell you that here in SW Washington, NOTHING can shake local loyalty to Donald Trump.

by

  Hi Virginia,

During the Republican primaries, Trump got MUCH more media attention than his rivals, which enabled him to spend much less on campaign ads than, say, Jeb Bush, who spent many millions. I began to get the impression that the MSM was doing its best to help Trump get nominated, thinking he would be the candidate Hillary could most easily beat, not to mention fanning internal dissension among Republicans so as to hurt them in the Senate and House as well.

If so, the MSM shot itself in the foot.

by

Other Tink, the person I spoke with a few days ago does not even believe the election was close, nor that Hillary got the most popular vote. This person is absolutely convinced Trump won by a  landslide, and MSM covered that up...

And I find it intriguing that you/anyone could even speculate the media motives of 'helping' Trump - because he would be easiest for Hillary to defeat! I am not sure I myself would give MSM that much credit, beyond the obvious motive of stirring the pot for the sake of more drama, any kind, but grist for their mill.

I myself would tend to see MSM more in the same light as attorneys who try to stir up adversarial controversy for the sake of more business...

by

@ Virginia,

Lol, no, Hillary won the national popular vote by about 3 million, and over 4 million of that came from California.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/12/16/california-final-2016-election-tally-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/

And another 1.5 million from New York City. 

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/new-york?mcubz=0

And no, I don't think the MSM has an active anti-Republican conspiracy with meetings, exchanges of memos, etc., but simply represents the natural inclination of a profession whose members vote for Democrats over 90% of the time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/05/06/just-7-percent-of-journalists-are-republicans-thats-far-less-than-even-a-decade-ago/?utm_term=.d4af0c8e3ead


Is this page not working?

Click here to see the recent version of this page

...