Connect with us


Media Attempts to Spin Biden's Tirade Into a Triumph – RealClearPolitics





Story Stream

recent articles

On Tuesday, Twitter was, well, atwitter with clips of Joe Biden’s confrontation with a union worker in a Detroit auto plant. The man in a hard hat told Biden, “You are actively trying to end our Second Amendment rights and take away our guns.” To which the former vice president responded, “You’re full of s—!” and the conversation went downhill from there. Nothing about the exchange was particularly flattering for Biden, who not only mangled the facts but threatened to “slap” the voter for good measure.

To hear the media tell it, this was great moment for Biden. In order to make that confounding claim, the media chose ignore the substance of what Biden said and his angry behavior, and skipped right to talking about the “optics” of the confrontation, which involves a lot of tendentious meta-analysis of how they think the event might be perceived by other voters. This is not reporting — it’s spin.

MSNBC anchor Joy-Ann Reid went so far as to declare, “Biden in this clip was forceful but composed, quite the opposite of what his foes have been depicting him as.” She was just one of a bevy of reporters and commentators who rode to Biden’s defense. 

Defending Biden in this instance would be bad enough, but excusing his outbursts is becoming a habit with the media. Biden was asked a perfectly legitimate question by a voter about how his son — who has a checkered personal history that involves drug addiction, taking bribes from Chinese businessmen, and fathering children with adult entertainers — got a no-show job with a Ukrainian gas company to the tune of a million dollars a years while Joe Biden was overseeing Ukraine affairs for the White House. Biden responded by not just calling the voter a “damn liar,” he called him “fat” and challenged him to take an IQ test.

The media, if it wants to retain any bipartisan credibility, can’t seriously be defending physical threats and gratuitous insults — but that’s exactly what they’ve done. CNN political reporter Maeve Reston wrote of the Iowa exchange, “In a human moment defending his son, Biden showed the authenticity, emotion and readiness for a fight that appeals to so many Democrats as they look for someone who can take on Trump.”

There has been no shortage of reporting on the business dealings of Trump’s children and son-in-law. Can anyone imagine Trump dismissing questions about his adult children with personal insults and a CNN reporter turning around and saying it was a “human moment” showing “authenticity”? What about Biden’s threat to “slap” the union worker while pointing a finger at him in close quarters? If Trump did that, would the media describe him as “forceful but composed”?

Similarly, the media are anxious to defend Biden this time around by bowling right over the facts. ABC News’ chief political analyst Matthew Dowd said the exchange over guns with a union worker was a “net plus” because “voters are sick of the typical political speak … Voters want somebody that they can trust, and is genuine, and has believability.”

It’s telling that Dowd is simply asserting his views, not making an argument on the merits that the exchange proves Biden is trustworthy. At one point, Biden referred to “AR-14s” when he clearly meant to say “AR-15s.”  Then Biden asked the worker, “Are you able to own a machine gun?” The worker rightfully noted, “Machine guns are illegal.” Biden seemed to think he had the man. “That’s right. So AR-15’s illegal,” he said. The worker incredulously – and quite correctly – responded, “That’s not a machine gun. It’s a semi-automatic.” The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America – Americans own somewhere between five to ten million of them – so not knowing anything about it makes it hard to take Biden seriously on guns.

As for Biden’s denial that he wants to confiscate anyone’s guns, this, too, is a reasonable concern that demands a far better answer than “you’re full of shit.” Biden’s official campaign policy on guns is a reinstatement of the so-called “assault weapons ban” and “calls for a voluntary buyback program of assault weapons, stopping short of candidates and advocates who are calling for a mandatory gun buyback,” according to the Washington Post.

However, Biden has recently said he would appoint former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke his “gun control czar,” after O’Rourke dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Biden. O’Rourke is famous for declaring at a Democratic debate, “Hell, yes, we are going to take your AR-15.”

Biden himself seemed to tell CNN’s Anderson Cooper that gun confiscation is not out of the question. “To gun owners out there who say, well, a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns,” asked Cooper. Biden responded, “Bingo. You’re right, if you have an assault weapon … They should be illegal, period.”

Perhaps Biden is against gun confiscation, but that’s open to interpretation, and his policy position borders on the incoherent. Voters are hardly out of line to question him on this on this issue.

Instead, what we get out of this episode is facile analysis such as CNN’s Chris Cillizza saying, “Why Joe Biden’s confrontation with an auto worker in Detroit is probably a good thing for him.” According to Cillizza, Biden’s outburst is excusable because there’s “a huge double standard. When Trump tells people where they can stick it, his fans say he’s being tough and standing up for America. When Biden does the same, he’s unhinged.”

There’s a double standard here all right – but it’s not what Cillizza thinks it is. No one cares about the fact that political partisans are hypocritical — that’s obvious, and almost expected. The media, on the other hand, are supposed to assess events with at least a minimum level of professional detachment and objectivity. Yet, when Trump acts addled and insults people, the media has no trouble clearly saying what happened. When a 77-year-old Joe Biden, who was gaffe-prone back in his prime, mangles the facts, gratuitously insults, and physically threatens an ordinary voter whose only crime is asking a pointed question – the media have an obligation to tell it straight – not try and spin an embarrassing episode into a political victory.

Mark Hemingway is a writer in Alexandria, Va. You can follow him on twitter @heminator.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link


Bell Media radio stations back on the air in Fredericton after tower collapses – CTV News



Radio stations owned by Bell Media were are off the air in Fredericton Friday morning.

The tower is located on Rookwood Avenue, between the Capital Winter Club and Bell Media radio headquarters. It fell behind the club’s building just before 9 a.m.

No one was injured. There doesn’t appear to be any damage to the building.

The area is secured and taped off.

The cause of the collapse is unknown, but high winds are believed to have been a factor.

Bell Media radio stations Capital FM 106.9, The Fox 105.3 and Pure Country 103.5 were off the air on the radio dial for several hours. They are now back on the air.

Bell Media also owns CTV.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


Saskatoon internal medicine and ICU specialist takes to social media to dispel COVID-19 myths – Saskatoon StarPhoenix



And the last reason was I started to see a lot of messages on WhatsApp and Facebook where people are just spreading complete nonsense, spreading things that were not entirely accurate and, not only not accurate, but very damaging and potentially dangerous. So I thought (these videos) would be a good venue for someone local, who has credentials and background that people can trust and understand, to share information. And people’s response has been encouraging and now it has become a regular part of my week.

Q: What are the biggest misconceptions about COVID-19 that you’re seeing?

A: There’s a very, very small group that still believes that this is not a big deal or this is a hoax. And admittedly, the number of those people is very, very small and not very significant. And I think the majority of the public dismisses them very quickly and I don’t think their influence is quite major.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


News media industry's troubles intensify during COVID-19 pandemic –



Publishers and media experts are urging the federal government to offer enhanced financial supports for Canada’s news media sector, where a long-standing trend of declining revenue has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault last week announced measures to help shore up the media sector during the COVID-19-induced economic slowdown, including putting in place some $595 million in long-promised tax measures and vowing to invest money from the government’s $33-million national pandemic awareness campaign in Canadian media outlets.

Industry representatives, however, say the tax supports are simply rehashed policy announcements from 2018, and that access to meaningful funding is desperately needed to help the sector move to a sustainable business model.

“The industry is really going to run out of cash very soon,” said John Hinds, CEO of newspaper advocacy group News Media Canada. 

READ MORE: Modernized federal fund will support the creation of Canadian content, industry groups say

As part of the government’s COVID-19 media support plan, Guilbeault also announced a simplified funding process for beneficiaries of the Canada Periodical Fund so eligible weekly newspapers will get their money in a matter of weeks, not months.

Steven Guilbeault, Canada’s heritage minister. Bruce Campion-Smith/Toronto Star

The Department of Canadian Heritage said about $16 million of the $75 million Canada Periodical Fund goes to to non-daily newspapers, while the remaining nearly $55 million goes to the magazine sector.

Hinds — whose News Media Canada members receive about $10 million of the $16 million allotted to non-daily newspapers — said Guilbeault’s announcement means his members will receive the same funding they got last year, shortening the waiting period. He said the measure is a short-term solution that will address the urgent need to get money to publishers, many of whom do not have a financial reserve to weather events like the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Bob Cox, publisher for the Winnipeg Free Press, which is not eligible for funding under the Periodical Fund as a daily newspaper, said he was “stunned” the government didn’t offer any new support for his industry. He said there’s more benefit in the federal emergency wage subsidy than in the government’s announcement for the media sector.

The emergency subsidy supports businesses that have seen a 30 per cent drop in revenue because of the COVID-19 pandemic through a wage subsidy of 75 per cent of the first $58,700 of annual salary of workers, which equals to up to $847 a week. The program will offer support for up to three months, backdated to March 15.

READ MORE: Federal wage subsidy for small businesses to increase to 75 per cent: Trudeau

Cox said the emergency fund should be enough to keep journalists working and the publications afloat during the pandemic, but warned the sector has long-term problems that must be addressed. 

Shawn McCarthy, president of the Canadian Committee of World Press Freedom, said the industry’s problem is two-pronged: advertising revenue is moving to social media and consumers are unwilling to pay for a product they’ve long accessed for free. He said many outlets began introducing paywalls or subscriptions for online content around eight years ago, but readers responded by turning to news aggregators or social media for free content.

A report from Statista found that advertising revenue for the newspaper industry stood at $3.43 billion in 2003 but more than halved to $1.63 billion by 2018.

McCarthy, the former Globe and Mail parliamentary bureau chief, said the CBC, Canada’s publicly funded broadcaster, became a huge competitor for TV, radio, and eventually print publications when it started producing online content.

“How do you persuade people to buy expensive subscriptions to the Toronto Star or the Globe and Mail when they can go and get the content for free on CBC,” he said. “[It’s] a huge challenge for the papers.”

While the industry tries to reinvent its business model into something sustainable, McCarthy said an economic downturn similar to the 2008-2009 financial crisis would level a major blow to outlets barely keeping their heads above water when the economy is stable. The response to the COVID-19 pandemic will likely lead to the loss of many journalism jobs and local publications, he said, as efforts to blunt the spread of the virus push the global economy into a recession.

Early last week, before the federal emergency fund was announced, La Presse reported that the National Cooperative of Independent Information, the cooperative that brings together six daily papers in Quebec, would temporarily lay-off 143 people because of the COVID-19 pandemic — almost half the number of people employed by the papers collectively. The cooperative attributed the lay-offs to a “brutal and unprecedented drop in advertising revenue.”

La Presse also announced a temporary 10 per cent reduction in salaries for union members, managers and senior executives.

On Friday, Cox sent a memo to Winnipeg Free Press staff proposing a 12 to 20 per cent pay cut for employees to address ad revenue losses resulting from COVID-19. Unionized staff with vote on the proposal with Unifor, Canada’s largest media union, while Cox himself will take a 50 per cent pay cut.

A spokesperson from Guilbeault’s office said the minister has been speaking to various media organizations about declining advertising revenues and other issues.

“We are currently studying all the options in this regard and are working on more measures to support the industry,” Guilbeault’s press secretary Camille Gagné-Raynauld said in an emailed statement.

Chris Waddell, a journalism professor at Carleton University, said the problem is that most Canadians simply won’t pay for online news, reverting instead to social media where they view it for free. He said many readers  don’t make a distinction between quality and quantity news reporting.

“The challenge that newspapers face is their audience is declining, but they’re afraid to offend their existing audience by saying ‘we’re not printing anymore’ because they have no guarantees they can replace existing print audience with a digital audience that’s prepared to pay,” he said. 

Waddell’s theory is supported by a  2019 study from on digital news led by Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford University, which found that only 9 per cent of Canadians are willing to pay for online news.

Despite consumers unwillingness to paying for news content, Cox said the new reality is an industry transitioning from a reliance on advertising to a subscription-based model. He said interim measures, like the federal government’s targeted tax credits, could help papers adjust and move online but they’re taking too long to implement.

“We don’t have that time…we’re closing down papers literally every week,” Cox said, adding that it took the government over a year to create an advisory board which is partly responsible for administering tax credit. 

The advisory board, promised in Dec. 2019, will “make recommendations” to the Canadian Revenue Agency on whether a journalism organization meets certain criteria to receive the Qualified Canadian Journalism Organization (QCJO) designation, the CRA said in an email to iPolitics. Only QCJOs will be eligible for the tax credits.

While organizations await confirmation on eligibility, Cox said a wage subsidy for journalists, one of the three incentives rolled out in the 2018 aid package, has yet to pay a dollar to anyone because the legislation is fraught with complications that make it “unworkable.”  

The credit, known officially as the Journalism Labour Tax Credit, allows QCJOs to apply for a 25 per cent refundable tax credit on salaries or wages of eligible newsroom employees for periods beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2019. The credit is subject to a cap of $55,000, for a maximum tax credit of $13,750 per employee, and is only applicable for written news content.

Cox said his corporation can’t receive funding from the media bailout because it’s a partnership — a business operation between two or more individuals who share management and profits — and it has no way of receiving the tax credit as partnerships don’t file tax returns.

“The government is looking at it from a corporate basis and not on a publication basis…now they feel they can’t pay anything out,” he said. “I think [the subsidy] would be a great benefit to us if we could get the money, but we haven’t been able to get the money.” 

Minister Guilbeault’s office said they are monitoring the program and its results closely.

However, Waddell said there’s no way to determine whether the wage subsidy is working because the government didn’t include an objective for the measure in the support package.

“From a policy point of view, if you’re going to subsidize something you need to have an objective and reason for subsidizing it,” he said. “And frankly, there’s no indication that subsidizing somebody for a while is going to change the circumstances so they’re going to get better off.”

Another new measure from the federal government, which came into effect Jan. 1, 2020, allows not-for-profit news organizations to apply for charitable status, meaning they can receive donations and issue tax receipts to donors. 

Waddell said this program may work for some companies, but said it’s a costly transition from a corporation to a non-profit and there are many rules they must to meet the CRA’s guidelines, including establishing a board of directors and keeping detailed financial records.

“It’s not that easy to do,” he said. “It is expensive.”

The former longtime CBC and Globe and Mail  journalist also said, unlike the United States, Canada doesn’t have a history of philanthropic efforts to support journalism. Waddell said donations to Canadian media companies tend to amount to people donating to specific projects, like sending a reporter to a remote region, rather than to cover operating costs.

“It’s much harder to find people who will donate just to keep the lights on,” he said.

The last tax credit encourages Canadians to pay for online news through a 15 per cent non-refundable personal income tax credit for digital news subscription costs paid by an individual to a QCJO, which applies to qualifying amounts paid after 2019 and before 2025.

Waddell said the program “may have some limited benefit”  but noted that it could have an effect similar to the former Conservative government’s Children’s Fitness Tax Credit. The program was criticized for benefitting those who already have the capacity to pay for a child’s fitness program, rather than helping others meet the financial bar.

While publications struggle to have consumers pay for content, McCarthy said the industry must be cautious in how it accepts government money as it struggles to retain public trust. He added that the price of government intervention might be a hit on the industry’s credibility, but that credibility won’t be an issue if the industry isn’t around anymore.

McCarthy also said the COVID-19 pandemic may be an opportunity for Canadians to reassess the importance of Canadians news organizations. He noted that many publications, including legacy papers like the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star, have lowered paywalls amid the crisis so Canadians can access reliable news.

“I think there’s a hope that people will recognize coming through this crisis just how important is it to have solid information that has been vetted by journalists and editors, as opposed to relying on hearsay on social media,” McCarthy said.  “Whether that translates into individuals being willing to pay for it is another story.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading