adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Media

The media is awash in Trump coverage…again – CNN

Published

 on


(CNN)Donald Trump has been out of office for 17 months.

But he seems to be everywhere in the media again these days — everywhere. And it is not just a result of the compelling hearings by the select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection and Trump’s role in it.
Trump’s ubiquity was particularly obvious in coverage of Tuesday’s primary elections. The prism through which the majority of next-day stories in mainstream media was viewed: how Trump-backed candidates fared.
The top of Page One of the Washington Post’s print edition Wednesday carried the headline: “Over 100 GOP primary victors backed ‘big lie.'” The sub-head: “Embracing Trump claims is part of winning formula.” The exclusive also led The Post’s homepage for most of the day.
Television and mobile screens were filled Wednesday with such banners as, “Big Primary Wins for Trump Backed Candidates” and “Trump candidates have mixed success during primaries in several key states.”
Using the vote totals in primaries as an instant barometer of Trump’s influence or lack of it makes sense at some levels, analysts say. But some also question whether that is the best kind of election coverage we can offer. Should that be the primary focus of reports? Is there a danger in framing coverage of crucial midterm elections in terms of Trump?
And the larger question: How is it that this failed 2020 candidate continues to so dominate the media landscape and the national political conversation at a moment when American life is filled with so many challenges?
“The first thing about Trump being so heavily invoked in midterm elections is that it’s very unusual. We usually think of midterms as being a referendum on the current president,” said Robert C. Lieberman, John Hopkins University political science professor and co-author of “Four Threats: The Recurring Crisis of American Democracy.”
Lieberman acknowledged that there is a “fair bit” of such coverage in terms of President Biden’s approval ratings and the “tough place” the economy is in, “but to have the former president hovering so closely over the midterm elections is unusual.”
Furthermore, so much of the coverage is what Lieberman dismissively characterized as a “scorecard of Trump endorsements.”
While there are valid reasons for heavy Trump coverage in the midterms, such scorecard reporting can fail citizens at a time when more informed and in-depth journalism is needed, according to Regina G. Lawrence, associate dean of the School of Journalism and Communication at the University of Oregon and author of “When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina.”
“There’s been a pattern throughout this midterm season of treating each Republican race as a referendum on Trump’s continuing influence. That’s not without some good reason—he IS the biggest figure by far, still, in the Republican party,” Lawrence said.
But that “heavy focus on Trump risks missing other important themes this election season,” she added. “For one thing, it risks missing the rise of any candidates who don’t fit that simple binary. I think voters around the country may be eager to learn more about candidates and races that pivot on more than just Trump. So, in that sense, Trump’s omnipresence is … an unhelpful way of informing people about a really complex moment in American politics.”
Tobe Berkovitz, associate professor of advertising emeritus at Boston University and veteran of 30 years of political campaign advising, also feels this moment in American life calls for more than a focus on Trump endorsements.
“Most political coverage, and this is pre-age-of-Donald Trump, has been obsessed with personalities, obsessed with horse races, obsessed with scandal to the detriment of trying to inform the public about issues,” Berkovitz said. “But right now, people are paying over five bucks a gallon for gas, some families can’t find formula for their infants, there’s a war still raging in Urkaine and inflation is out of control. One would hope that both the politicians and the media would focus more on these.”
The other major reason Trump seems to be everywhere on our screens, of course, is the January 6th hearings.
The Trump-focused hearings have done well in terms of audience: 20 million viewers opening night in prime time and 11 million or so for the first morning session.
There are myriad reasons for that success beyond American viewers liking or hating Trump enough to watch. One reason is the skilled production. The committee made a wise choice in hiring James Goldston, former president of ABC News, as an adviser to help make the proceedings media-friendly without compromising their seriousness.
In tone and structure, they resemble a Netflix true crime documentary series, with teases for what is to come in the next episode and a feel of being backstage as a crime is being plotted. Then, there is another level of formulaic TV familiarity with Trump being depicted in the mold of the amoral, ruthless politician Francis Underwood played by Kevin Spacey in the fictional “House of Cards.”
Televising the hearings is a public service in the best sense of the term. We desperately need to try and document what a danger to democracy Trump has been and continues to be. We need to unravel how the insurrection happened. But even as the committee goes about trying to do that, the telecasts can have the reverse effect of enhancing his stature as a result of his uber presence on our screens.
“As we’ve learned from experience, mainstream media can end up amplifying anti-democratic (little “d”) messages even when they don’t intend to. Paying inordinate attention to Trump adds fuel to the rightwing information ecosystem that supports the larger Trumpian movement and its antidemocratic and white nationalist elements,” said Lawrence.
“That’s not to say that journalists shouldn’t be covering Trump, but that they can find more expansive ways of talking about what’s at stake right now, which may be democracy itself,” Lawrence added.
Lieberman, who has written extensively on democracy, says Trump does matter to the midterms, but not so much as a person trying to pick winners and losers. What matters are the ways the lie he promulgated about a rigged 2020 election are affecting races today – the story the Washington Post targeted in its morning-after coverage Wednesday.
“What’s interesting is less Trump himself than his message of the stolen election that’s running through a lot of the campaigns … at the local and state level,” Lieberman said. “That’s what I find alarming.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

300x250x1
Continue Reading

Media

Opinion | The Media Say Crime Is Going Down. Don't Believe It – The Wall Street Journal

Published

 on


[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Opinion | The Media Say Crime Is Going Down. Don’t Believe It  The Wall Street Journal

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

end-of-season media availability

Published

 on

By Justin Vézina At the end of its spectacular 2023-2024 season, the Laval Rocket held its end-of-season media availability to bring the campaign to a close. Ten players, plus head coach Jean-François Houle, appeared before the media.  For those who wish to view all the press conferences, they are presented below. However, for those who […]

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Forget Trump — the American media is on trial in New York – The Hill

Published

 on



300x250x1

Forget Trump — the American media is on trial in New York | The Hill








The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

It was July 2018, and Michael Avenatti was considering a presidential run. Anyone can consider running for president, I suppose. It’s just that when the lawyer for Stormy Daniels and cable news mainstay did it, important people — theoretically important, at least — in the press took it seriously.

CNN’s Jim Scuitto had Avenatti on to talk about it, and make a bit of a campaign pitch for himself, on July 4. The next day, CNN’s editor-at-large Chris Cillizza, one of the more prominent writers for the website back then, published a piece of analysis with the headline “President Michael Avenatti? Never say never!”

And sure, why not. Avenatti was riding high at the time. A couple months earlier, he was being pitched, according to the New York Times, for a “Crossfire”-like show with Anthony Scaramucci, the rapidly-defenestrated former Trump communications director, by mega-agent Jay Sures, who represents top CNN talent like Jake Tapper and Anderson Cooper. Maybe that’s why Avenatti became so ubiquitous on the network to begin with — embarrassingly so, in retrospect.

But if we look back to April, almost exactly six years ago, that’s when Avenatti truly burst onto the national scene. On April 9, 2018, the FBI raided the office of Michael Cohen, the long-time “fixer” and business associate of then-President Donald Trump. The next day, Avenatti was on Cooper’s CNN show to break it all down — from Stormy Daniels, his porn actress client, to Karen McDougal, the former Playboy playmate, to Cohen himself. It was Avenatti’s chance to craft the narrative for the media, and the media was happy to oblige.

The whole ordeal was portrayed a couple weeks later in a cringe-inducing “Saturday Night Live” cold open, with Ben Stiller playing Cohen, Jimmy Fallon playing Jared Kushner, and Stormy Daniels playing herself. (She struggled to nail the “Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!” line at the end.)

It’s worth reflecting this week on this bizarre 2018 moment, as it serves as the prelude to the first (and possibly only) trial of Trump in 2024. The trial that officially began on Monday isn’t about “insurrection” or “espionage” or classified documents or RICO. Oh no. It’s this reality TV, trashy tabloid junk about porn stars and Playmates — stuff that belongs more in the National Enquirer than the National Broadcasting Company.

Which is ironic, of course, because the first witness in the case was David Pecker, the former executive in charge of the National Enquirer. (It’s also ironic that Avenatti is now firmly on Team Trump, saying he’d be happy to testify for the defense, although of course he’s also currently in federal prison for wire fraud and tax fraud, so…)

It’s been more than six years since that initial FBI raid, and the original Avenatti media sin. But buckle up, here we go. We’re getting to hear about the way Trump teamed up with the National Enquirer in an effort to boost his 2016 campaign. A bit like how most of the establishment press today is teaming up with the Biden campaign to stop Trump in this cycle.

You know that story about Ted Cruz’s father potentially being involved in the murder of JFK? Totally made up, to help Trump in the primary! None of this is surprising, to any discerning news consumer. But it does allow the media to get on their proverbial high horse over “checkbook journalism” — as if the crusty old legacy press hasn’t been doing a version of it for decades, when ABC or NBC wants to secure a big “get” on their morning show. But the journalistic ethics of the National Enquirer are a red herring — a distraction from the substance of the trial.

After Pecker, we’ll get Cohen, and Daniels, and McDougal as witnesses. Avenatti, at least it seems for now, will stay in prison, and not get to return to the limelight.

This trial is a circus. But the media made their choice way back in 2018. And now they too are on trial.

To get meta for a minute, when I decide to devote my weekly column to a topic, I’m not only deciding the topic to cover, but making a decision about what not to cover as well. On a far larger and more consequential scale, every single news organization makes choices every day about what to focus on, how to cover it and what gets left on the cutting room floor.

Back during the Trump years, the media spent an inordinate amount of time dissecting every last detail of this tabloid journalism fodder we’re now seeing play out in a New York City courtroom — which is meaningless to the lives of nearly every American. The trial is the culmination of the inconsequential work that ate up so many hours of cable news, and occupied so much space in the most powerful media outlets in America. So much time and energy and resources that could have been devoted to literally any other story, including many that directly relate to Donald Trump. And yet now, here we are.

This trial has to matter for the American press. If it doesn’t, it invalidates their entire existence during 2018. But if the public tunes out — and, can you even imagine if a jury in New York City actually finds Trump not guilty at the end of this thing — well, it’s as much an indictment of the Trump-obsessed Acela media as it is of the system that brought these bizarre charges and salacious case in the first place.

Steve Krakauer, a NewsNation contributor, is the author of “Uncovered: How the Media Got Cozy with Power, Abandoned Its Principles, and Lost the People” and editor and host of the Fourth Watch newsletter and podcast.

Tags

Anthony Scaramucci


Chris Cillizza


CNN


David Pecker


David Pecker


Donald Trump


Jay Sures


media


Michael Avenatti


Michael Avenatti


National Enquirer


Stormy Daniels


Stormy Daniels


Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending