Post

Conversation

Matthew Yglesias
@mattyglesias
I think this discourse needs to distinguish better between “coverage whose tone is anti-Trump” and “coverage that is harmful to Trump.” Imagine if Fox spent three months doing segments about how it’s good that Trump will ban abortion, cut Medicaid, and do regressive tax policy.
Quote
Max Tani
@maxwelltani
I spoke with the top editors/heads of the New Yorker, WaPo, Axios, the Atlantic, the Information, More Perfect Union, and Crooked Media about what it says about the media that Trump won again despite almost a decade of overwhelmingly negative coverage semafor.com/article/11/10/
There’s a new version of this post
86.9K
Views
David Watson 🥑
Post your reply

Matthew Yglesias
@mattyglesias
Of course they wouldn’t do that because that would be bad for Trump. It’s a network that is interested, instrumentally, in the question of what helps Republicans and it selects topics accordingly. “Mainstream” media isn’t like that and probably won’t ever be.
25K
Matthew Yglesias
@mattyglesias
But Dems need politicians who appear in the media — all kinds of media — and make the points they want to make. Harris didn’t do Joe Rogan but she also didn’t do Chris Hayes! Future Forward does great ads but that can’t be the whole campaign.
101K
the point after touchdown! 🌐
@EntertainUrDad
I think if journalists had found a way to do coverage that was harmful to Trump they would have. They did a lot of coverage that they *thought* was harmful to Trump - MSG rally coverage, his admiration for fascists, etc - that actually was not.
505
Mutha Against Couch Fucking
@Lincoln_Cog
Yeah, well, and it’s the extent and breadth of the coverage, it’s visibility, whether it’s sustained or treated as baked in, and most importantly, whether they hold both parties to the same standards and cover stories objectively - rather than presenting both sides as equal/valid
208
Joseph Rizzo
@jlrizzoii
That's the fundamental problem. When media becomes more concerned about framing stories or even covering stories based on how beneficial or harmful to their favorites - in erodes trust in those sources.
540
jeff wylie
@Wylie93257
1 news outlet that does positive stories about Trump? And abc, nbc, cbs,cnn,msnbc, all the major news papers. 93 percent negative to trump and 89 percent positive to Harris from those network? Ok
253
Russells Teapot
@teapot_russells
That's just a very pedantic way of describing "anti-Trump coverage you disagree with" and "anti-Trump coverage you agree with". And because you're a partisan fanatic who doesn't care about facts, everything falls in the latter category for you, making the distinction useless.
42
Alexandre Lark
@Lark_Alexandre
Those things would be bad for Trump, if they were true. Of course you know that Trump does not support abortion bans at the national level and would like more lenient bans in some of the red states. He's never said anything about cutting medicaid. Regressive is subjective here.
158
elenor candy
@elenor_candy
all anti trump stuff from progressive news media ends up helping him bc they are so cartoonishly bad at reporting facts,. its all feelings and T is literally this or that
15
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content