• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: Media

An honors graduate of the Nathan Thurm School of Gaslighting…

30 Thursday Aug 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Donald Trump, Fascism, gaslighting, impeachment, investigation, Media, obstruction, Russia, social media, Twitter

This morning, via Twitter:

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
What’s going on at @CNN is happening, to different degrees, at other networks – with @NBCNews being the worst. The good news is that Andy Lack(y) is about to be fired(?) for incompetence, and much worse. When Lester Holt got caught fudging my tape on Russia, they were hurt badly!
6:02 AM – 30 Aug 2018

…with a major in Fascism.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
I just cannot state strongly enough how totally dishonest much of the Media is. Truth doesn’t matter to them, they only have their hatred & agenda. This includes fake books, which come out about me all the time, always anonymous sources, and are pure fiction. Enemy of the People!
6:11 AM – 30 Aug 2018

Hey, Sarah, Leni Riefenstahl had to put up with the same kind of “incivility” in 1938

26 Tuesday Jun 2018

Posted by Michael Bersin in Resist

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

#resist, children, concentration camps, Donald Trump, history, Hollywood, incivility, Leni Riefenstahl, lying, Media, Nazis, Sarah Sanders

Madera Tribune, Number 24, 30 November 1938
GIRL FRIEND, OF HITLER IS NOT WANTED
Anti-Nazi League Protest to Hollywood Visit of Leni Riefenstahl

HOLLYWOOD, Nov. 30. Advertisements bought by the Hollywood anti-nazi league today blared in big, black type: “There is no room in Hollywood for Leni Riefenstahl.” Miss Riefenstahl is the darkhaired German actress frequently mentioned as “Hitler’s girl friend.” She is in Hollywood for her first look at the American film studios. Hardly had Miss Riefenstahl settled her bags and given out another interview denying anything beyond a “business relationship” with Adolph Hitler, when the antinazi league went to work. It bought space in the Hollywood trade papers and urged the film colony to give the German actress a cold shoulder. The same kind of snub was given Premier Mussolini’s son, Vittorio, when he visited here last year. Young Mussolini went home abruptly, and reputedly angrily.

Apparently, Leni Riefenstahl and her dining party of twelve were refused service at a “Cabaret”. For being Nazis.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

#resist

What happens when Sinclair Broadcasting decides what news is fit to print … er, broadcast

29 Sunday Oct 2017

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Donald Trump, Jamie Allman, Media, Propaganda, Putin's Revenge, SAB, Sinclair Broadcasting, St. Louis School Board, Steele Dossier, The Allman Report, Thrive

Part one of Putin’s Revenge, a PBS Frontline investigation into the role Russia’s Vladimir Putin played in influencing the 2016 U.S. election, explores the rise of the Russian dictator and the events that determined his behavior toward the U.S. In the process it tells us how almost the first action that Putin took after assuming the role of Prime Minister was to engineer the takeover of independent TV broadcasting stations by rich “friends” of the Russian state apparatus personified by Putin. Since more than 90% of all Russians get their news from TV, this was an important step toward imposing an authoritarian state under Putin’s control.

Why is this interesting?

Almost as many Americans as Russians are dependent on TV for their news. Sinclair Broadcasting controls much of that news – and Sinclair, known for its conservative tilt, seems to be happily cavorting in Donald Trump’s grimy bed, perhaps even conspiring to make sure that the only news Americans get to see is friendly to Trumpland denizens

What does Sinclair get out of this relationship? First off, the proposed merger between Tribune News and Sinclair, which has been in danger of flunking the monopoly tests that the FCC uses to evaluate such mergers – precisely so that no company can take total control of American news sources – will come up for a vote in November. Wanna bet how Trump’s FCC, headed by a new chairman, Mitch McConnel’s boy, Ajit Pai, will vote? If the merger goes through – likely a foregone conclusion – seven out of ten Americans will potentially be getting their news from Sinclair. Second, the FCC just voted to relax long-standing rules that mandated that news outlets own and operate a station in the locale where they broadcast, moving us one step closer to content controlled, remotely distributed “news reports” that Sinclair has specialized in producing.

Sinclair is already a media player in Missouri. In the St. Louis area where I live, it owns ABC affiliate KDNL (broadcast channel 30). The merger would put two more stations in St. Louis under Sinclair’s thumb, KPLR and KTVU (broadcast channels 11 (CW) and 2 (Fox)). That’s three out of the four major St. Louis broadcast stations, folks. And broadcast is where many, often older, citizens get their local news.

And just consider what Sinclair has done with local news reports on KDNL: it’s gotten rid of them. And what have they put on in place of local news? Are you familiar with the rightwing radio noisemaker, Jamie Allman? If Sinclair dominates the local TV environment, I suspect folks in and around St. Louis will become more familiar than they like.

That’s because, instead of the local news programs that are traditionally broadcast at 5:00 and 10:00 pm, KDNL currently airs the Allman Report, a half hour blitz of honest-to-God fake news (the real thing, not Trump-labeled fake news.). To be fair, when challenged, Allman calls it “commentary,” not news, but it still occupies the niche we associate with local news broadcasts and, in the absence of any real local reporting, seems to be intended to fill that void.

This given, I thought I’d check out the Allman Report, so I watched the program all the way through last Wednesday. Here’s some of the highlights of what watchers learned in a single half-hour:

  • The President of Thrive STL, Bridget Van Means, was on the show to promote the latest TRAP law, SB5, that has come out of the Missouri legislature. Thrive, for those of you who aren’t aware of the organization, has made a name for itself by offering religiously-slanted, anti-birth control sex education in local schools. Thrive STL also runs several anti-abortion “crisis pregnancy” centers in the area. If I had taken Van Means at face value, I would have learned that the St. Louis Planned Parenthood clinic was a veritable abortion charnel house that has attempted to hide its bloody deeds by silencing the sirens of the ambulances that visit the clinic in higher numbers than anywhere else in the U.S. SB 5 will mandate that sirens be heard and women warned about the dangers of abortion. Whoopdie do. Van Means also wanted me to know that colonoscopies are more highly regulated than abortions – which, she believes, fully justifies the numerous restrictions imposed by SB5 – despite the fact that the consensus of most medial professionals is that they are medically unnecessary.
    • FACTCHECK: After being sued by an anti-abortion group, the infamous Operation Rescue, the St. Louis Fire Department released documents detailing the number of emergency pickups at the Planned Parenthood clinic from Jan. 2009 to April 2016. So what’s the appalling truth? There were 58 emergency calls during a period that saw 135,000 patient visit to the clinic. Moreover, at least half of these calls were not associated with abortion, but with other services offered by the clinic. As for the greater regulation of colonoscopies, they’re 10 times more likely than abortion to result in lethal complications – hence the more stringent regulations that insure similar survival outcomes.
  • Two members of the elected St. Louis School Board came on to tell us why control of the school board should revert from the Special Administrative Board (SAB) back to the elected board. The big takeaway here, judging from Allman’s response, was the astounding fact the elected board had not been in charge of St. Louis Schools for the last ten years. I guess he slept through all the Sturm und Drang that resulted in the appointment of the SAB. He certainly provided no further context to help folks understand the situation. My big takeaway: The President of the elected board allowed as to how folks are taking their children out of St. Louis schools and sending them to private or charter schools because they’re so bothered about the fact that the elected school board is being ignored.
    • FACTCHECK: Don’t know much about the merits of the current elected board, but I seem to remember reading that the loss of students from the public system predates the schism between the two boards and has a lot to do with the general factors that bedevil underfunded public school systems that serve poverty-stricken inner cities. It is a fact, nevertheless, that the SAB has brought the system back to a fully accredited status – and that it is currently involved in preparing to address the status of the two boards, two important facts that were, as I remember, not discussed.
  • In a final editorial segment, Allman asserted that recent revelations about how the DNC and the Clinton campaign had funded the research that went into the infamous Steele dossier somehow meant that Hillary Clinton was really the one that Robert Mueller has been investigating. Yeah, I know. Crazy, right? Allman did allow that the research had initially been commissioned by Republicans, but, then declared with utter confidence, though without any evidence, that the responsible Republican was none other than the nefarious, anti-Trump Jeb Bush.
    • FACTCHECK: The Steele dossier grew out of “oppo” research, common to all modern political campaigns. Nothing criminal there, nothing to trigger an investigation (although that won’t stop Republicans from “investigating it” – anything to divert attention from Trump’s ties to Russia). Nor was it ever used. The only criminal activities involved were laid out in the findings of the dossier which have excited the interest of the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller. It was, we have now learned, initially commissioned by the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative Website whose bills are paid by a prominent Republican donor, Richard Singer, a supporter of Marco Rubio during the GOP primary. No Jeb Bush.
  • An interesting incidental tidbit that popped up during a call-in segment suggests that things aren’t necessarily going to be roses for Josh Hawley’s effort to take Claire McCaskill’s seat. A sweet elderly-sounding lady told Allman that she could never vote for Hawley because he didn’t kiss Trump’s feet (a bit of literary license here, but you get the drift).
    • FACTCHECK: Time will tell.

In case this partial resume of Wednesday’s program hasn’t properly horrified you, bear in mind that the disgraced sex-offender and rightwing rage-machine, Bill O’Reilly, is currently in negotiations with Sinclair for a two-hour show to run on the broadcaster’s local stations starting at either 6:00 or 7:00 pm.

It looks like Putin’s favorite puppet has got the playbook – American version – down cold.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): press availability – Parkville, Missouri – April 13, 2017

14 Friday Apr 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in US Senate

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

Claire McCaskill, Media, missouri, Parkville, town hall

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) – speaking to the press – Parkville, Missouri – April 13, 2017.

After Thursday afternoon’s open public town hall at Park University in Parkville Senator Claire McCaskill (D) took questions from the press:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): …But I am confident, because, behind the scenes there are Republicans in the Senate that are just as committed as Democrats to getting all the facts out. And some of them serve on the Intelligence Committee. So, even if the chairman, uh, would veer off course and neglect to go after an area of evidence that is crucial I believe the Democrats and a few of the Republicans that are on the committee would be able to right that, um, that trajectory. And I also am very confident about [Senator] Lindsey Graham, who’s the chairman of a subcommittee on the Judiciary Committee. He said, in public at a hearing, that, on a committee that I’m on, in no uncertain terms, everybody needs to realize next time it’ll be the Republicans. This isn’t about Democrats or Republicans. This is about whether or not we allow Russia to try to break the backbone of the most important Democracy in the world. [crosstalk] That’s what he said.

Question: Senator, what do you…Senator, what do you, what did you mean by I want to get to the bottom of the op, opioid industry?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): I want to find out why we have five percent of the population and eighty percent of the opioids. Uh, that doesn’t happen by accident. They came from somewhere. Why do we have such an over prescribing in this country compared to other nations?

Question: Are you suggesting that these companies were not truthful about the addictive nature?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Well, we have anecdotal evidence that at least one of these companies actually said at one point, uh, that less than one percent of the population will be addicted by his drug. Um, that is totally factually incorrect. And we want to find out if this was going on a wide scale basis, what it is was an individual salesman that said something inappropriate, that’s why we need all the documents we’ve requested from these companies. And we [voice: “Are you getting them?”] …We’ve made a formal request. It’s a long list so we’re gonna give them some time. But, we’re not gonna stop until we do.

Question: Senator you mentioned, uh, that, having conversations with colleagues in Washington encouraging them not to look down on Trump voters. Uh, what does the party have to do nationally and what do you have to do specifically to help persuade those Trump voters, what you are talking about, that we’re the ones fighting for you on these issues? Obviously you’re gonna, you’re going into a tough fight in twenty-eighteen and you’re acutely aware of that. So, if could you speak about both yourself and the party nationally.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Well, I think it’s important that I, I’m comfortable in the role of underdog. Um, I’ve been here many times before. I think it’s also important that I’m not afraid to go anywhere in this state and encounter people who disagree with me. Uh, you know, if you want to hide behind a spokesman or if you want to hide behind talking points or some, by some technology that’s not a good substitute for getting out into these small communities, looking folks in the eye, and say, talk to me, I respect you, talk to me. What can I be doing better? How can I improve? Uh, what can I be fighting for that you’re really frustrated by? And I think doing that matters and that’s what I’m gonna do.

Question: So does that make this the unofficial start of the, the reelect campaign? I mean if somebody like Brian or I would say, you know, unofficially this, it, it started here. Would be, would we be wrong?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Well, I, you know, I think, um, you know, when you’re hired by the public then you have an obligation to the public throughout your tenure. So, if you want to be rehired you need to do a job, a good job for your entire tenure. So, I hope I’ve been doing that kind of work, uh, since Missourians elected e in twenty-twelve. But, I’m certainly gonna continue to do that kind of work the next eighteen months and then we’ll let the chips fall where they may.

Question: The unofficial start then?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Uh, that’s your words, not mine. [crosstalk] You’re not gonna get me to say it.

Question: You said, you did say at one point that, um, there’s a tea party type movement going on in the Democratic Party. Can you elaborate on that?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): I, I don’t think I used the word tea party but I do think there’s [crosstalk]…

Question: So there’s something like [crosstalk] the tea party going on?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Yeah, there’s a, there’s a, there’s an energy that is different. Um, we’ll be releasing our fundraising numbers for the first quarter and, uh, in a few hours and, um, it [laugh] it, it’s, it’s different, it’s different. People are really engaged. People are showing up. People are speaking out. People want to be organized. They want to do more.[voice: “That’s a good thing.”] Uh, and that’s a great thing. I, I, I’m tickled pink about that.

Question: When you talked about the Democratic Party in particular and factions in the party that might make it hard for a, a centrist like you who works across both sides of the aisle.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Well, you, I think that’s a reality I need to acknowledge. Um, I am not afraid to call myself a moderate. And I’m not gonna change who I am. I’m not gonna shift with the polls, I’m not gonna shift with the wind. I’m a moderate. And that means sometimes as you saw today I give answers that some of the people in the base of my party are not happy with. But I’m hoping that overall they see that I stand up, uh, when I need to, that I’ve had some guts and I’ve had the courage of conviction to take on some really hard problems. And I think they also realize Missouri’s a tough state for somebody who has a D behind their name.

Question: What were some of the, uh, questions that you were expecting to hear versus what you heard out in the town hall today?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Um, I certainly am getting questions about health care everywhere. Um, I think people are very worried about losing their health care. Uh, I think Missourians particularly, um, we’re a state, for the life of me I’ll never figure out why, uh, the governor of our state is not doing what the governor of Indiana did, Governor Pence. He said, I’ll take the federal tax dollars that Indianans are due and I’ll devise our own Medicaid program. Why doesn’t Missouri do that? Why are we allowing other states to spend the money that Missourians have paid in in their federal taxes? And by the way, that’s where opioid treatment comes from. Most of the opioid treatment in this country is Medicaid. So, they, they want to talk about what a serious problem opioids are and they won’t even take the money that we’re due when they can design their own program. It’s very frustrating for me and, um, so I think that’s one of the reasons health care always comes up. I’m a little surprised we haven’t had more on foreign policy and the conflicts that are ongoing in Syria and, obviously, today, um, we had a, uh, a very large bomb dropped in Afghanistan which is out of the ordinary for what we have been doing in Afghanistan. So I’m a little surprised we didn’t have more foreign policy questions. [crosstalk] I don’t know enough about it yet. I just found out about it before I walked in here. So as a member of the Armed Services Committee I’ve learned the hard way don’t talk about it until you know about it.

Question: Senator you’ve always been a big supporter of labor. Does it concern you now that Missouri has decided to go with right to work.

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Yeah. I’m, by the way we’ve created more jobs in Missouri over the last several years than surrounding states that were right to work. I think this idea that if, uh, we take away the right of people to bargain for a wage, workers to bargain for a wage, that somehow that makes us less attractive to, to companies. I, I just think it’s silly. It’s not true. Um, look, you know, bargaining for good wages and benefits is pretty all American. I mean it’s one of the things that built the middle class in this country. And as we try to focus on workers and helping workers and people who are trying to get ahead why in the world would we engage to a race to the bottom on wages? The only thing we know for sure about right to work it means everybody’s gonna take a cut in pay. And, now, maybe it helps the guys at the top of the company do better, but it doesn’t help the people that are struggling, um, that are trying to raise a family and trying to send kids to college. And so I’m gonna try to help repeal it, um, on the ballot next year. We’re gonna try to get it on the ballot repeal it. There’s a provision to do that. We’re gonna work really hard to get it done.

Question: Senator, do you have any opportunity to talk to Governor Greitens since he’s been sworn into office about some of these issues like health care that do involve both federal and state policymakers?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): I have not. Um, he did reach out to me one time after he was elected, but we haven’t talked since then. I was, um, gratified to see that he announced a big broadband program, uh, uh, a week ago when he said Missouri’s putting six million dollars in it. And I thought, started thinking I’m pretty sure that most of that money is federal. He didn’t mention that, but thirty-two million of the money is federal money. Um, so what he’s doing is leveraging, which is by the way what we do with Medicaid, Missouri puts in ten cents and the federal government pays ninety. So he’s putting in twenty cents and the federal government is putting in eighty for the broadband program. The more we can work together on those projects, we got no heads up that he was doing that, um, the more we can work together the more efficient and effective those programs will be. And I’m really worried about REAL ID. Um, I’m worried that Missourians aren’t gonna be able to get on a plan a year from now because the Missouri legislature has not given Missourians the option of getting an ID that will be compliant to get on an airplane.

Question: Your two thousand nine, uh, town hall tour was very similar geographically but, uh, the tone is very different. What do you attribute that to?

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): Yeah. It, this is different. Um, you know, I think some of my Republican colleagues are hiding and don’t want to come out and do town halls. Especially the members of Congress. It is shocking to me that there’s members of Congress that have never done a town hall. Um, I want to tell them you should have come with me in two thousand nine, um, it would have been easy to hide under the desk in two thousand nine because people were really upset. And I knew when I went out there I was gonna get yelled at. And I did. But I learned. And I think that people understood that I was willing to encounter conflict and people who didn’t like me, people who disagreed with me. I think it’s important. And, but this is different. This has been, um, if somebody would have told me, I don’t know if you remember the town hall that I did in Hillsboro, Jefferson County in two thousand nine. But it was tough. And yesterday I walked in to a standing ovation, so it was a little bit like here. I don’t know what’s up, but it’s kind of fun.

Question: Are you referring to either Representative [Anne] Wagner of Representative [Vicky] Hartzler, people who have been mentioned as possible opponents[crosstalk]…

Senator Claire McCaskill (D): I, I, all of them. I’m not aware of any of them. Have any of them done town halls that you know of? I don’t think any of them have done a town hall. You know, if you can’t do a town hall I’m not sure why you would run. I think you’re supposed to be serving the public. I’m pretty sure, so.

Anybody else? Thanks guys.

Previously:

You think Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) has been smiling a lot this week? (February 23, 2017)

What a difference eight years makes (April 13, 2017)

If only Roy Blunt (r) could give him something to do at one of his open town halls in Missouri (April 13, 2017)

This ain’t 2009 and right wingnut billionaires ain’t paying to rile up teabaggers (April 13, 2017)

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D): word

18 Saturday Feb 2017

Posted by Michael Bersin in social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

5th Congressional District, CBC, Congressional Black Caucus, Donald Trump, Emanuel Cleaver, Media, missouri, MSNBC, social media, Twitter

“…but I’m also really pleased that he didn’t ask her to, to sweep and mop, um, in the, uh, in the room where the press conference was being held…”

Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D) [2017 file photo].

Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D) [2017 file photo].

Donald Trump (r) held a press conference on Thursday:

[….]
Q    Well, when you say — when you say the inner cities, are you going to include the CBC, Mr. President, in your conversations with your urban agenda, your inner city agenda, as well as your —

THE PRESIDENT:  Am I going include who?

Q    Are you going to include the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, as well as — 

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I would.  I tell you what, do you want to set up the meeting?  Do you want to set up the meeting?

Q    No, no, no.
 
THE PRESIDENT:  Are they friends of yours?

Q    I’m just a reporter.
 
THE PRESIDENT:  No, go ahead, set up the meeting.

Q    I know some of them, but I’m sure they’re watching right now.
[….]

Yesterday, from MSNBC, via Twitter:

kylegriffin021717

The transcript:

MSNBC: Congressman Cleaver has, has there been any sort of dialog between either your office or the CBC’s office, any sort of informal dialog, perhaps, uh, with, with the new administration so far?

Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D): No, I, I don’t think there’s been any, uh, contact or communication. Uh, I don’t even think, to be one hundred per cent honest, that, uh, the president even knew what the CBC was yesterday. Uh [crosstalk].

MSNBC: Really, Congressman Cleaver, you don’t think that President Trump knew that?

Representative Cleaver (D): Uh, I don’t think he had any idea. And I’ve looked at that tape, uh, over and over again and he was like, what in the world are you asking me? And had April not said, uh, Congressional Black Caucus, had she continued to say the CBC, I think he would have said, I, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Uh, but I’m also really pleased that he didn’t ask her to, to sweep and mop, um, in the, uh, in the room where the press conference was being held. I thought it was disrespectful.

The word is mightier than the small fingered vulgarian.

Help fight Trumpworld lies

29 Thursday Dec 2016

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Donald Trump, Journalism, Media, Political lies

Progressives woke up on November 9th to a world gone sour. Sure, we grieved for awhile but we almost immediately began thinking about how to resist the worst of what the Trump cabal promised to bring about. The good news is that there’s plenty that we can do. Specifically, Trump’s propensity for obvious lies offers all of us what will – sadly – likely be an ongoing opportunity.

We can inform ourselves and when media fails to sufficiently point out Big Orange’s mendacity, we can call them on it with whatever tools we may have, for example, send admonitory emails or make phone calls to the editor of our local papers, submit letters to the editor for publication, or use Twitter or Facebook to point out examples of lax reporting.

Greg Sargent points out examples of one type of the media failure I am referencing. He examined the headlines that greeted Trump’s effort to take credit for bringing Sprint jobs to the US – a move by Sprint that was announced in April of 2015 and that did not necessarily have anything to do with Trump (who also seems to have at times inflated the number of jobs from 5000 to 8000). With a few exceptions, most of the headlines obligingly repeated Trump’s claim although the body the articles may have suggested reasons to doubt its veracity .

Sargent suggests that in cases like this bit of unsupported braggadocio, “if the headline does not convey the fact that Trump’s claim is in question or open to doubt, based on the known facts, then it is insufficiently informative” or even “misleading” because many people simply “scan headlines without digging deeper into the stories and the factual details.” He suggests that care in constructing headlines is important because:

..  it’s obvious that Trump has adopted a strategy of actively trying to game such headlines in his favor. Trump’s claims about Carrier jobs staying in Indiana turned out to be significantly less rosy upon closer inspection. And remember when Trump falsely claimed credit for keeping a Ford plant here that was going to stay anyway? It really doesn’t take much to convey it in a headline when Trump’s claim is in doubt

Headlines are not the only place where media may mislead due to an overly casual approach to reporting. Recently, in a St. Louis Post-Dispatch article on newly proposed right-to-work-for-less legislation in Missouri, the reporter glibly stated that the legislation would make it unlawful to force workers to join unions, a blatantly misleading statement. Workers are not now required to join a union, although, if they enjoy the benefits of a union contract – from which they cannot by law be excluded – they must pay at least a portion of the dues paid by union members. Folks who receive benefits paid for by the actual union members are nothing more than free-loaders if they don’t pay their share of the cost.

Examples of such misrepresentation are rife and promise to be especially common as media struggles to deal with the serial-liar and champion deflector who will soon be President of the US. In fact, the failure to deal with his lies and the false narratives emanating from political propaganda outlets like Fox News and Breitbart.com may have significantly contributed to the fact we are now facing a walking, talking disaster like our new President-elect.

It becomes our obligation to point out problems in reporting and presentation of news when we notice them and to demand that journalists do better. Responding to the lies of the Trump mafia by refusing to let our media either inadvertently or intentionally perpetuate them is one of our first tasks. So, let’s get busy – if we are to be effective, there has to be lots of voices calling out Trump and other rightwing liars along with their media enablers.

*1st sentence of last paragraph slightly rewritten for clarity.

Reality really does bite: Where Hillary’s emails and God’s problems with profanity intersect

29 Saturday Oct 2016

Posted by willykay in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Election 2016, Emails, Hillary Clinton, Media, morality, Roderigo Duterte

I read today that Philippine’s President Rodrigo Duterte has had a message from God:

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has promised to stop swearing, saying God spoke to him on a flight from Japan on Thursday, warning him the plane would crash if he kept using bad language.

This is the same Duterte who is directly or indirectly responsible for the murder of more than 2,400 people in a less than three month period. Most of these people were suspected drug dealers or users which, according to the quasi-facist Duterte and his supporters, makes it okay for police and death squads to condemn and execute them at will.

And then Duterte has the chutzpah to tell us that God is disturbed by his bad language.

It’s enough to put one off God.

But religion isn’t the real issue. Nor does the matter at hand have anything to do with conditions that are unique to the Philppines or any other “foreign” or “under-developed” country. It’s a question of perspective and its relation to our moral values, a question we in the United States have been confronted with every day during the current election.

Today, for instance, the paper version of my local paper, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, ran a headline in one-inch caps reading “FBI Reviews New Emails.” The text ran down the left side of the front page and, on the other half, a half-lit profile of Hillary Clinton emerged from the dark background. Pretty sensational news, right?

Well no — although almost anyone seeing that headline layout will go away thinking that these emails constitute a momentous, game-changing discovery.

But as most of those who’ve paid attention know, once again this is much ado about nothing. The “new” emails were as Political Animal’s Nancy Letourneau notes, not from Hillary Clinton, not from her private server, not withheld from the FBI by Clinton, and are likely duplicates of emails already examined by the FBI — which is not, as many in the (perhaps intentionally) credulous media have asserted, “reopening” their investigation of Clinton.

Nevertheless, this latest irrelevant diversion will hold center stage for the next few days and possibly influence the direction of the election. The big orange pseudo-Mussolini is already crowing about how this news vindicates his absurd “Hillary Clinton for prison” war cry. Although it is unlikely to cost Clinton the presidency (knock on wood), it could depress her margin of victory, which would clear the path for a resurgent Trump or an über–nationalist Trump clone in 2018. Nor would it help with down-ballot races. At the very least, it may provide more ammunition for the GOP dead-enders who will inevitably seek to delegitimize a Clinton victory.

Meanwhile, the complex of forces unleashed in the Middle East by Bush’s invasion of Iraq are laying waste to the region, immigrants are flooding into the Western World — an influx that will only grow as the ravages of climate change increase. The warming of our world, if not mitigated in a timely fashion, will create environmental and economic wastelands. Economic and social inequality threaten the stability of the West while we are held in thrall by the ascendancy of ‘free market” advocates and oligarchs who seek to weaken the power of government to effect necessary long-term changes.

There are hard days ahead no matter who wins the election and none of it has anything to do with emails. And yet the media wants to persuade us that the election of our leaders should hinge on a just such unfounded suggestions of scandal.

It’s all a matter of moral perspective. Something that both Duterte’s God and our trivial entertainment and celebrity-sodden media culture seem to lack.

*Cross posted to Daily Kos.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose – the 2016 presidential campaign edition

28 Sunday Feb 2016

Posted by Michael Bersin in media criticism, meta

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Media, meta, missouri, stenographers, Supreme Court

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

From the 2000 Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. That little black dot at the lower left in the image is a "stinger" allegedly deployed for crowd control outside the perimeter by the LAPD on the first night of the convention.

From the 2000 Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. That little black dot at the lower left in the image is a “stinger” allegedly deployed for crowd control outside the perimeter by the LAPD on the first night of the convention.

The stakes are the same. The environment may be a little different.

Sixteen years ago I was elected at the congressional district level as a national delegate pledged to vote to nominate Al Gore at the Democratic National Convention. I had been active in the party for years and, like everyone else who wanted to be a delegate, ran a campaign on my behalf to convince other county level delegates (over 100, if I recall correctly) to elect me. I was successful, but it wasn’t easy nor was the outcome assured.

In 2000 old media just plain didn’t like Al Gore.

I spent a lot of time on the floor of the convention (the Missouri delegation had center front seats, right behind the Tennessee delegation) and had plenty of opportunity to watch and interact with old media – broadcast and print.

On one of the evenings before Al Gore’s acceptance speech a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Dennis Farney, was interviewing Missouri delegates, asking, as I recall, what Al Gore had to say in his speech to convince us that he could convince others and anyone who was listening to support his candidacy [my interpretation of the questions]. I remember thinking, “What the @&%#? We’re all Gore delegates, he doesn’t have to convince us of anything.” So, I edged over and started talking at the reporter. I told him that I thought most people weren’t paying attention yet and that when they did they’d get it. I told him that I grew up in Arizona and that we had a saying about people like George W. Bush, “He’s all hat, and no cattle.” This is what ran in the paper on Friday morning:

Wall Street Journal, August 17, 2000, A24, “Missouri Delegation has One Hope for Gore: Show the Real Man”, Dennis Farney.

…Delegates from Missouri, the Show-Me State have a direct but difficult expectation of Al Gore when he speaks tonight…

[….]

‘All Hat and No Cattle’

…”Then people will realize that Bush is all hat and no cattle,” predicts Michael Bersin…

[….]

“Difficult?” Yeah, he wrote that.

After the 2000 and 2004 elections the media landscape changed dramatically. Sure, The Faux News Channel still has a sizeable and steady (though demographically challenging) viewership, but in comparison to 2000 and 2004 there is now a wider variety and greater number of new media resources providing information to counter what was then part of the dominant conventional wisdom.

That’s why we exist.

Does anyone believe that Hillary Clinton’s or Bernie Sander’s candidacies would have survived the 2000 or 2004 media environment? It does remain to be seen about 2016. But the world has changed – just a bit. It’s more difficult now for the right to sling bullshit and for old media stenographers to uncritically repeat it.

And that’s why we’ll continue to do what we do. The stakes are high. They always are.

Previously:

The world has changed (February 13, 2016)

Originalism in a time of argle-bargle (February 14, 2016)

Clarity in a time of right wingnut political fog (February 15, 2016)

SR 1181: “I felt a tiny disturbance in the Force, as if a half dozen voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced…”

07 Thursday Jan 2016

Posted by Michael Bersin in media criticism, Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Media, meta, missouri, press table, SR 1181

Or exiled to the fourth floor gallery. A rule change, filed yesterday in the Missouri Senate:

SR 1181 Proposed Rule Change – Rule 16 reallocates use of reporters’ table in Senate Chamber
Sponsor: Richard
LR Number: 5617S.02I Fiscal Notes
Committee:
Last Action: 1/7/2016 – Resolutions Calendar–SR 1181-Richard Journal Page:

Title: Calendar Position: 1
Effective Date: Upon approval

SR 1181 – This Senate Rule change provides that, beginning March 29, 2016, the press table in the Senate Chamber shall no longer be used the press and shall instead be available for use by Senators’ staff and Senate staff. Reporters wishing to view the proceedings of the Senate shall do so from a reserved space in the fourth floor gallery. Laptop computers may be used by Senators’ staff and Senate staff at the newly designated “staff table”.

Uh, welcome to the diminished access club. Losing a bit of access sort of sucks, doesn’t it? Our advice: invest in set of binoculars.

Previously:

SB 694: See where sucking up to them gets you? (January 24, 2012)

HB 858: A shield?

06 Friday Feb 2015

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

HB 858, Media, missouri, shield law

A bill, filed yesterday by Representative Joe Don McGaugh (r):

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 858 [pdf]

98TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE MCGAUGH.

2008L.01I D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 491, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to the disclosure of news sources and information.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

Section A. Chapter 491, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 491.003, to read as follows:

491.003. 1. For the purposes of this section, the following terms shall mean:

(1) “Covered person”, any person or entity that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means, and that meets one of the following three criteria:

(a) Publishes, in either print or electronic form, a newspaper, book, magazine, pamphlet, or any other periodical; or

(b) Operates a radio or television broadcast station, a network of such stations, a cable system, a satellite carrier, or a channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier; or

(c) Operates a news agency or wire service, or a news or feature syndicate.

A “covered person” shall also include: a parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of any entity described in this subdivision, if such parent, subsidiary, or affiliate is engaged in news gathering or the dissemination of news and information; or an employee, contractor, or other person who gathers, edits, photographs, records, prepares, or disseminates news or information for any person or entity described in this subdivision;

2) “Unpublished or nonbroadcast information”, information not disseminated to the public by the person from whom disclosure is sought nor by any entity described in this section, including but not limited to, any notes, photographs, tapes, film, outtakes, or other data, regardless of whether information based upon or related to such information has been disseminated.

2. No covered person shall be required to disclose, in any federal or state proceeding, including but not limited to any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, the source of any published or unpublished, broadcast or nonbroadcast information obtained in the gathering, receiving, or processing of information for any covered person. No covered person shall be required to disclose, in any federal or state proceeding, including but not limited to any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, any unpublished or nonbroadcast information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving, or processing of information for any covered person.

3. If any person or entity claims the privilege provided by this section, the person or entity seeking the information may move the circuit court of the county in which the proceeding is located for an order divesting such privilege and ordering the disclosure of the information sought. The motion shall allege the name of the person or entity claiming the privilege, the entity with which that person or entity was connected at the time of obtaining the information, the specific information sought and how it is relevant to the proceedings, and the necessity of disclosure of the information.

4. In granting or denying divestiture of the privilege provided in this section, the court shall consider the nature of the proceedings; the merits of the claim or defense; the adequacy of any remedy otherwise available; the possibility of establishing by other means that which it is alleged the source or information will tend to prove; the public interest in protecting the confidentiality of any source as balanced against the public interest in requiring disclosure; and the relevancy of the source or information.

5. Any order granting divestiture of the privilege provided by this section shall issue only if the court finds in a written order or in recorded proceedings that:

(1) The information sought does not involve matters or details necessary in any proceeding that are required to be kept secret under federal or state law, and that all other available sources of information have been exhausted; and

(2) Disclosure of the information is essential to the protection of the public interest involved in the proceedings.

6. If the court orders divestiture of the privilege provided by this section, it shall also order the person to disclose the information it has determined must be disclosed, subject to any protective conditions the court may deem necessary or appropriate.

7. The privilege provided by this section shall remain in effect during the pendency of any appeal.

[emphasis in original]

It’s all in the details, isn’t it?

“….Covered person”, any person or entity that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means, and that meets one of the following three criteria: (a) Publishes, in either print or electronic form, a newspaper, book, magazine, pamphlet, or any other periodical [….] (c) Operates a news agency or wire service, or a news or feature syndicate….”

Hey, that’s us.

“…No covered person shall be required to disclose, in any federal or state proceeding, including but not limited to any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, the source of any published or unpublished, broadcast or nonbroadcast information obtained in the gathering, receiving, or processing of information for any covered person. No covered person shall be required to disclose, in any federal or state proceeding, including but not limited to any criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding, any unpublished or nonbroadcast information obtained or prepared in gathering, receiving, or processing of information for any covered person….”

Can they dictate the federal part?

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • Close
  • Campaign Finance: way, way in
  • Things that go “boom” in the night
  • Campaign Finance: keep it coming
  • Campaign Finance: “Welcome to the party, pal”

Recent Comments

Uh, in case you were… on Some right wingnuts with money…
Winning at losing… on Passing the gas – Donald…
TACO Tuesday | Show… on TACO or Mushrooms?
TACO Tuesday | Show… on So much winning
So much winning | Sh… on Passing the gas – Donald…

Archives

  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 1,051,573 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

Loading Comments...