New Benghazi Email Shows DOD Offered State Department “Forces that Could Move to Benghazi” Immediate

[BuckysBadger24]

I see this common theme of people blaming the media for the lack of action on this issue, but give me a fucking break. The media is all over reporting on Benghazi. It is covered all the time. Every major news outlet has covered Benghazi in depth, many many times.

@BuckysBadger24 you do realize that people care about a lot of different things right? Most people don't care about what happened in Lybia today, let alone a few years ago. People also realize that this is most likely a witch hunt. Lastly many people realize that events like this do not a president make or break. People care about how the policies affect them and only them, If they even actually understand the policies.

Well yeah, of course I realize that. Blaming the media? The media is a major catalyst to how people shape their opinions on any given subject. Maybe you're seeing different news than I am, but I hardly see anyone calling for heads outside of Fox, who pushes in the wrong way to the point that I understand why people call it a witch hunt. I'm not solely blaming the media for a lack of justice, but the facts as they "are" are reported hand in hand with their slant, whether it's the extreme right or left. There's hardly an in between.

And yes people care about other issues as well, when they consider who their candidate will be, or at least I would hope they would. But I think it's pretty clear that foreign policy, how IS will be dealt with, relations with Russia and Iran, etc. will in the end hugely dictate victory for the candidate who lays it out the best. I think that battle is being clearly won right now by Hilary, with Trump staying close. To say the media is having little effect on that just doesn't ring true to me. Many people may realize, and certainly should realize, that this topic alone doesn't make a candidate. But it's the hottest issue out there, with people across the globe dying every day at IS hands. The fact that Hillary is even in contention, let alone the front runner, after the shit she pulled on Benghazi, speaks volumes to the medias effect. She should be looking at criminal punishment, not running for POTUS, in my opinion.

 

[AWP]

I realize this is only from yesterday and deals with Trump, but the media is admitting they can and will editorialize where Trump is concerned. They're admitting impartiality is irrelevant to them.

The media unload on Donald Trump - CNNPolitics.com

Tom Brokaw, the veteran NBC News anchor, has called Trump's proposal "dangerous," and likened it to the Holocaust and the Japanese internment. On its front page, The New York Times has said Trump's idea is "more typically associated with hate groups." Dan Balz, of The Washington Post, has called Trump's rhetoric "demagogic," while BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith has informed staff that it is acceptable to refer to Trump on social media as a "mendacious racist," because, he said, those are facts.

The willingness to use such language and draw such analogies represents a watershed moment in the media's coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign, several journalists and political observers told CNN. For the first time in six months, news organizations are abandoning concerns about impartiality and evenhandedness and stating what they believe are objective truths about the Republican's most popular presidential candidate.

If they are openly stating this now, I can't believe they haven't acted upon their beliefs in the past.

 

[Red Flag 1]

I realize this is only from yesterday and deals with Trump, but the media is admitting they can and will editorialize where Trump is concerned. They're admitting impartiality is irrelevant to them.

The media unload on Donald Trump - CNNPolitics.com



If they are openly stating this now, I can't believe they haven't acted upon their beliefs in the past.

I hate the media for what it is doing to our nation. I would love to see 24/7 "news" broadcasts go back to the days of Huntley and Brinkley, John Cameron Swazey, and Walter Cronkite; before Cornkite's ego exploded. We pretty much can cover all the is "news" in about an hour.

 

[BuckysBadger24]

I'd love to have had the chance to have experienced any one of those anchors period. My entire life has been "everything good that happens is because of OUR guys, and they'd have done more good things if it wasn't for THEIR guys". Legitimate agenda-less opinions and mature debating was a major focal point for me joining this site in the first place.

 

[Brill]

I realize this is only from yesterday and deals with Trump, but the media is admitting they can and will editorialize where Trump is concerned. They're admitting impartiality is irrelevant to them.
If they are openly stating this now, I can't believe they haven't acted upon their beliefs in the past.

At least we have the press to tell the People the truth as they see it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/how-many-mass-shootings-are-there-really.html?_r=2

 

[pardus]

At least we have the press to tell the People the truth as they see it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/how-many-mass-shootings-are-there-really.html?_r=2

Original article...

A Guide to Mass Shootings in America

 

[Gunz]

The presentation and packaging of the "news" has always been about selective editorializing and biased slants, since before the Civil War. There's never been an unbiased newsman or newswoman because they've never figured out how to make reporters out of robots.
With so many media outlets competition is fierce. There's no room for the quiet, steady or sensible presentation of news. It's all about making such a Big Noise that you can be heard above all the shouting. Sensationalism, controversy, sex and fear grab attention, drive the numbers and generate revenue.

Having said that, I think Benghazi is as dead an issue as POTUS's birth certificate. The country is so polarized it would take something so egregious, so inescapably and undeniably shocking to shake the very core of HRC's support base. Nothing would give me more pleasure then to see her hauled off in handcuffs...but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[pardus]

The presentation and packaging of the "news" has always been about selective editorializing and biased slants, since before the Civil War. There's never been an unbiased newsman or newswoman because they've never figured out how to make reporters out of robots.
With so many media outlets competition is fierce. There's no room for the quiet, steady or sensible presentation of news. It's all about making such a Big Noise that you can be heard above all the shouting. Sensationalism, controversy, sex and fear grab attention, drive the numbers and generate revenue.

Having said that, I think Benghazi is as dead an issue as POTUS's birth certificate. The country is so polarized it would take something so egregious, so inescapably and undeniably shocking to shake the very core of HRC's support base. Nothing would give me more pleasure then to see her hauled off in handcuffs...but it ain't gonna happen.

Agree with the bold in particular.

 

[Devildoc]

The presentation and packaging of the "news" has always been about selective editorializing and biased slants, since before the Civil War. There's never been an unbiased newsman or newswoman because they've never figured out how to make reporters out of robots.
With so many media outlets competition is fierce. There's no room for the quiet, steady or sensible presentation of news. It's all about making such a Big Noise that you can be heard above all the shouting. Sensationalism, controversy, sex and fear grab attention, drive the numbers and generate revenue.

Having said that, I think Benghazi is as dead an issue as POTUS's birth certificate. The country is so polarized it would take something so egregious, so inescapably and undeniably shocking to shake the very core of HRC's support base. Nothing would give me more pleasure then to see her hauled off in handcuffs...but it ain't gonna happen.

I disagree with the underlined. There are plenty of unbiased reporters; unfortunately, the further up the media food chain they go the more their objectivity gets stripped. Some of the best reporters are the small-town and mid-market reporters.

I do agree with the italicized. The rub, as I explained to my wife: no one cares. To this point she has literally been linked to suspicious deaths of political operatives, and no one cared; who is going to care about this aside from the people who would vote against her anyway?

 

[Red Flag 1]

Small town and regional newspapers are where journalism is kept alive. Once a reporter moves to larger mainstream/syndicated newspapers the pay is much, much better. The problem is the cool aide you have to drink and then vomit up with every word you speak or write. It's all about the $, at the expense of acurate raw journalism.

 

[Devildoc]

My first job out of college, ink still wet on a BA/poli sci degree, was as the county government reporter for a town newspaper. Whopping $10,500 a year, no OT (but did get comp time). Hated it. HATED it. But I learned so much. Those vets at the paper, though, they were incredible mentors.