Jim Acosta Thread

[_DarkHelmet]

I understand exactly what you're saying in terms of how he interprets and characterizes Trump critical reporting.

But, words have meaning. Without applying my own political bias to it, I can easily see that the Washington Post headline itself was inaccurate.

Hillary Clinton called fake news "an epidemic". Do you disagree that it is?

I agree that actual fake news is a problem, and I might even classify it as an enemy of the people. But we need to define the term "fake news". Most news organizations accused of being fake news are actually simply biased towards one position or another. FOX News and MSNBC are biased, not fake. The newspapers and pamphlets that existed back when our founding fathers made sure free press was protected make MSNBC and FOX News look balanced by comparison. People like Alex Jones are entertainers, and I wouldn't even classify him as fake news. But we have technology today that can be used to create video and audio of people saying and doing things that they never actually said or did. That's fake news, and we have anonymous people using social media to push actual fake news to the masses. It's a problem that our founding fathers never could have predicted, and I'm not sure what the answer is. But when Donald Trump cries "FAKE NEWS!" he isn't talking about actual fake news. He is describing news that is critical of him, the very news that the founding fathers protected. Ironically, Russia is one of the biggest pushers of fake news, but Trump doesn't believe that.

So to answer your question, yes, fake news is a problem, and can be called an enemy of the people. But the Washington Post headline is accurate because Trump is not describing real fake news. He is describing any news that is critical of him. The ability to criticize the president is the hallmark of a free press. Therefore, Trump calls the free press an enemy of the people.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

https://variety.com/2018/politics/news/ ... 203012794/

So if fake news media = enemy of the people, which outlets fall into that category?

Quite a few. The first time that Trump used the phrase, “enemy of the American people,” he identified the New York Times, NBC News, ABC, CBS, and CNN. He’s also called the Washington Post “fake news” several times. In a Sept. 16 tweet, he characterized all of mainstream media as “fake news.”

So, I don't think you need a PhD in Communications to figure out that Trump labels anyone with whom he has a grudge, in the media, as 'fake news' and that 'fake news' is the 'enemy of the people' and that he himself has said the mainstream media is fake news.

There's no way around this, Jersey Girl. Any media outlets or personality that isn't kissing his ass is an 'enemy of the people'.

- Doc

[_subgenius]

Trump doesn't spend all day talking about them....

Yet, here you are, doing just that. Thank you for proving my point.

not really all day and not my thread...but its a weakness of mine watching you guys chase your tails.

[_subgenius]

So, he's an all-star. What in the world is wrong with you, subgenius? Don't you ever take, like, one damned second to google something or wikipedia it before you make a claim? You do this so often and with such consistency I'd like to believe you're a false flag Democrat operative playing the role of a dull Conservative. But the fact of the matter you're not. You're actually like this. This is you.

Jesus.

- Doc

I apologize for you having to google his resume' and distilling his "qualifications" for employment....but my assertion was about his professional qualities....of which he is absent of as exhibited, consistently, by his behavior.

I have not implied that he was unaware of how to read a teleprompter or that he read a political science textbook...but good reporters manifest their "qualities" through their work and their actions...and for all that schooling, all of them learn that journalism 101 is "don't be the story " and Acosta has insisted othedwise for quite some time.

Or are you asserting that Acosta jerking the mic away and pushing her arm away is the result of a top-shelf journalism pedigree?...that his consistent lack of actual question asking for the sake of initiating argument and inserting his own opinions are the hallmarks of professional qualities with regards to journalism?


But i get your point, going to a good music school means you are a good musician, and going to MIT makes you a brilliant engineer...and to question such a pedigree for any academic because of their actual work is blasphemous.

So, my "claim" still stands, mainly because the video proves contrary to your lengthy and irrelevant wiki citation.

[_Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl,

What's good way to summarize Trump's position so we don't have to always caveat his words to suit your notion of reality?

- Doc

I know I'm ignoring the bulk of your post, I'll come back later to try to engage it more completely. Let me give this one question a go for right now.

I think his position (which is clouded in self serving bias--though on the surface it holds merit) is that when the media fails to report accurately or incompletely, it can have a deleterious effect on the public's right to know and know accurately what has taken place, and therefore form judgements, opinions and make decisions about it. In other words, he's saying that the media is feeding us a line of biased BS that suits their purposes. That we're not fully informed. Essentially, that's as true as it was when Hillary Clinton addressed it.

Not so far beneath the surface (because we all see how he's leveraging that concept to his advantage) I think his real intention is to make people doubt what they read (and even what they hear--I think he actually said not to believe what we hear!) because he wants to steer us away from anything critical of him so we think he's God's gift and doubt everyone but him.

How's that for political commentary?

[_canpakes]

Yet, here you are, doing just that. Thank you for proving my point.

not really all day and not my thread...but its a weakness of mine watching you guys chase your tails.

Cool. We live inside your head, too. : )

[_canpakes]

But i get your point, going to a good music school means you are a good musician, and going to MIT makes you a brilliant engineer...and to question such a pedigree for any academic because of their actual work is blasphemous.

Says the fellow who claims to be an architect, for some reason.

So, my "claim" still stands, mainly because the video proves contrary to your lengthy and irrelevant wiki citation.

Looks like your claim has been handily refuted by the record and left you standing on the curb wailing for attention, like your President.

Let’s hope you at least have more integrity than the White House does. ; )

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

But i get your point, going to a good music school means you are a good musician, and going to MIT makes you a brilliant engineer...and to question such a pedigree for any academic because of their actual work is blasphemous.

So, my "claim" still stands, mainly because the video proves contrary to your lengthy and irrelevant wiki citation.

Going to Juliard probably means you're musically talented. Going to MIT, like my ex-FIL did, probably means you're pretty damned smart.

Tell you what. What is your standard vis a vis "professional qualities that can be reasonably defended by anyone on this board."

So, if schooling and career success aren't good enough then what's the standard given your requirement quoted above?

- Doc

[_subgenius]

not really all day and not my thread...but its a weakness of mine watching you guys chase your tails.

Cool. We live inside your head, too. : )

but not rent-free, you work for it.

[_subgenius]

But i get your point, going to a good music school means you are a good musician, and going to MIT makes you a brilliant engineer...and to question such a pedigree for any academic because of their actual work is blasphemous.

So, my "claim" still stands, mainly because the video proves contrary to your lengthy and irrelevant wiki citation.

Going to Juliard probably means you're musically talented. Going to MIT, like my ex-FIL did, probably means you're pretty damned smart.

Tell you what. What is your standard vis a vis "professional qualities that can be reasonably defended by anyone on this board."

So, if schooling and career success aren't good enough then what's the standard given your requirement quoted above?

- Doc

Again, i think you are confusing professional qualities with professional qualifications.
Clearly my condemnation is founded on his professional behavior over the past +12 months. And not upon his undergraduate report card. Nevertheless, getting a job at a tv news network doesn't equal "professional quality" does it?
So save us the sophomoric appeals to authority and try to distinguish between Acosta's behavior during a White House press conference and the professional qualities found in competent journalists.
For example, 3 "professjonal qualities" that you failed to wiki-cite are:

1. Not becoming the story
2. Asking questions and reporting answers
3. Honesty