Just a bit ago, I mocked MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow for her convoluted allegation that Trump may have sent MSNBC fake documents implicating himself in regards to Russia.
For details, please see Rachel Maddow Accuses Trump of Planting Fake Documents Implicating Trump
Glen Greenwald at The Intercept also challenges Maddow. Greenwald offers substantial evidence that Maddow’s event timeline is full of holes.
Greenwald politely writes Rachel Maddow’s Exclusive “Scoop” About A Fake NSA Document Raises Several Key Questions.
MSNBC’S Rachel Maddow devoted the first 21 minutes of her Thursday night program to what she promoted as an “exclusive” scoop. The cable news host said that someone had sent her a “carefully forged” top secret NSA document that used a top secret document The Intercept reported on and published on June 5 as a template. That document – from the June 5 Intercept report – was from an unknown NSA official, and purported to describe Russian attempts to hack election officials and suppliers.
Maddow said her report should serve as a “heads up” to other news organizations that someone is attempting to destroy the credibility of those who report on Trump’s connections to Russia by purposely giving them false information. She suggested, without stating, that this may have been what caused CNN and other outlets recently to publish reports about Trump and/or Russia that ended up being retracted.
The grave tone of cloak-and-daggers mystery Maddow used to tell her story was predicated on her time-line of events. If it were the case that MSNBC had received the purportedly forged version of this document before the Intercept published its own version, that would indeed be a major story. That would mean that the person who sent the forgery to MSNBC was one of a relatively small group of people who would have had access to this top secret document.
But that’s not what happened. By Maddow’s own telling, MSNBC received the document two days after the Intercept published it for the entire world to see. That means that literally anyone with internet access could have taken the document from the Intercept’s site, altered it, and sent it to Maddow.
Nobody from Maddow’s show or MSNBC reached out to the Intercept before running this story. This was odd for many reasons, including the fact that Maddow offered several speculative theories about the Intercept’s reporting on the document, including her belief that a crease that appeared on the document sent to her was the same as the crease which the Trump DOJ, in its affidavit, claimed appeared on the Intercept’s document.
Had MSNBC sought comment from the Intercept before broadcasting this story, they would have learned that the sole piece of evidence on which their entire theory was predicated – the time-stamp that preceded the Intercept’s publication by a few hours – strongly suggests that whoever sent them the document did not have special, early, pre-publication access to it, but rather took it from the Intercept’s site.
While it is of course possible that there is some widespread, coordinated, official effort to feed news outlets false information in order to discredit stories about Trump and Russia, there is no real evidence for that theory, and this story does not offer any. Maddow’s warnings about the need for caution and authentication are important ones, but if – as seems likely – the document MSNBC received was sent by someone who got it from the Intercept’s site, then the significance of this story seems very minimal, and the more ominous theories her report raises seem to be baseless.
Maddow needs a new theory. I can help.
Theory #1: Maddow Thesis Explaining Timestamp
- The Intercept received documents showing Trump’s involvement.
- The Trump organization or someone acting on behalf of Trump, stole those documents off The Intercept server before The Intercept published the story.
- Someone then cleverly changed the timestamp to match The Intercept’s publish time. This step was necessary so The Intercept does not realize its servers are constantly compromised.
- In an effort to trap MSNBC, the Trump organization modified the documents to point directly at someone in the Trump organization.
- MSNBC was brilliant because it fell for none of this.
Theory #2
Someone acting to discredit Trump is throwing mud hoping to start multiple simultaneous investigations that just might uncover something.
Theory #3
This has nothing to do with anything in particular. Someone wanted to see how gullible MSNBC is. Why not? In doing so, they caught MSNBC in a roundabout way because MSNBC failed to contact The Intercept then ridiculously over-dramatized the whole affair.
Theory #4
MSNBC created the fake documents then sent them to itself to get this alleged scoop.
Maddow’s Fake Drama
Maddow made no mention that Democrats or anyone anti-Trump else may have sent that document to MSNBC.
I explained in Rachel Maddow Accuses Trump of Planting Fake Documents Implicating Trump
No Mention of Democratic Mud-Slinging
Apparently, there is no chance that Democrats or someone acting to discredit Trump are throwing mud hoping to start multiple simultaneous investigations that just might uncover something.
Merits of Being Open-Minded
I repeat my sarcastic Tweet.
While pretending to have an open mind that “Trump may have been involved”, Maddow’s reporting was clearly disguised to plant the notion Trump is in fact behind this conspiracy.
Skepticism
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
The MSM is dying as they have been exposed repeatedly to having aired fake news and conspiracy theories.
To prevent falling ratings they are doubling down on their strategy of fake news in the hope that they continue to stay alive.
This is an extremely risky move that could result in corporate journalistic suicide.
No, no no. Fake news is anything that is not anti-trump; and it must be stopped at all costs. False news is par for the course. MSNBC and Rachel Maddow simply aired false news.
I don’t watch her show. Has Maddow become the Glenn Beck of MSNBC?
At least Glenn Beck provided some entertainment value.
I’m also trying to remember an old movie or tv show where a lawyer referred to the time-code on a video and said it would be very difficult to fake that. Yeah, right, time codes on videos and computer documents can’t be faked.
There is a scene like that in Strange Brew. Thanks for reminding me of that movie. Steamroller, eh.
Media organisations need to be held accountable for their dishonest behaviors. It’s beyond a joke how most of the media treat trump. All i can see is the media being regulated more by the government and in the process losing all credibility as a trusted medium. Can these people that report false news and influence the stock market be held liable for their actions It seems the FBI don’t give a fuck either!!!!!
Me neither. I never watch her my self except a u tube video generally included with a blog. I remember her as sort of has been commentator /comedian? a dingbat for sure, much like Minnesota’s Senator Al Franken (stein). I can not remember ever hearing from her except exaggeration and factually unsubstantiated reporting no matter what she had to say.
Can’t for MSNBC to go the way of CNN.. 8>D
I’m sure top Republicans never try to trip up the media in the manner Maddow suggests … oh, wait:
Maine governor suggests he makes up stories to mislead media:
https://apnews.com/2ac40e6934974d1283258f1c1e0ffc72
Cue comments about how the AP is fake news.
*Gosh*, you’re dumb.
Thanks for those words of wisdom. That probably taxed your creative skills.
So, no ability to deal with the fact that the whole premise that Maddow based her warning on is supported by the words of a senior politician. Here they are in case you missed them:
“I just love to sit in my office and make up ways so they’ll write these stupid stories because they are just so stupid, it’s awful,” he told WGAN-AM on Thursday.”
Maddow and MSNBC took publicly available information and passed it onto their readers as super secret material that was given to them to mislead.
Since you were there, I assume you know. You were there, right?
What the Maine Governor owned up to was NOT to attempts to mislead the media but attempts at showing how gullible and stupid the media is. In that he has succeeded as the media is mostly made up of blinkered partisan (mostly left) idiots who don’t check the facts before they run their stupid stories and then cry foul when they end up being embarrassed.
So he was feeding them facts the media don’t check, but they are not facts so the media looks bad because they didn’t check that his facts aren’t actually facts?
Isn’t that basically what I said? He tries to feed them lies to print to make them look bad?
On the plus side, at least with 45 we can expect that hotel arrangements will be top priority, what with all his expertise in the hospitality business and all that:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world-0/us-politics/donald-trump-g20-summit-hamburg-hotel-room-germany-us-president-meetings-a7827166.html
Funniest part is that there was a block booking for camels for the Saudi King even though he didn’t come in the end (the King likes his camel milk fresh, it turns out).
What a clown show.
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
1. It wasn’t too long ago that Dan Rather and CBS News fell for a document that purported to show George Bush didn’t do his military duty but that was overlooked because of his family connections and influence. That was quote probably the truth but the document was a fake and as a result CBS got a massive black eye. So yes if you are pro-Trump it would be helpful if you could get a MSM outlet to fall for an anti-Trump story and then it turns out to be fake.
2. This makes the Democratic anti-Trump operative theory pretty suspect. An anti-Trump activist would have to not only think the document would be good enough for MSNBC to air it, but also good enough that everyone else would continue to buy into it. But how could they? Trump is in charge of the gov’t and the NSA could confirm the doc is fake even if the forgery was masterfully done….which it wasn’t.
3. Other actors are also possible. Someone might have simply wanted to try to sell a fake document. Trolls like the idea of conning and getting a 15 min. of fame. More sinister, fueling multiple, contradictory stories is something that’s been well documented in Putin’s Russia. Operatives will feed fake new headlines for both rabidly anti-Putin as well as pro-Putin sources. Unlike propaganda from the WWII and 1950’s era, modern propaganda is happy to push stories that attack the gov’t if they serve the larger goal of discrediting all media making truth something that’s seen as optional or simply a choice.
4. Somewhat related to #3, research. Someone feeds fake news to outlets trying to see how much checking is done…how fast an outlet will publish versus fact check something. This will tell them when they do want to create a fake story, how much effort they need to put into making it seem real.
5. Any serious MSM outlet gets fake stuff like this all the time. Maddow, not getting any real scope, blew up what would have been a ho-hum event in other places.
Dan Rather was the father of fake news. The FACT that the documents were FAKE, in no way effects the veracity of the story…right?
This is ALL we have heard from the leftist media since trump has come on the scene. Each and every story that has come out, sourced from “reliable anonymous sources” has fallen on it’s face relative to it’s truth or claimed relevancy, yet that FACT has in no way blunted their claims. This stupid Russian thing is funny, sad and depressing as they have been “investigating” and busily “leaking” anything that smells of borscht, and with each failure to show ANYTHING relevant, their accusations and demands for MOAR grows only louder.
Fake news is about false consensus, the continual repetition of falsities that create enough public perception that it is true, that they can actually USE this consensus itself as the PROOF. “Everybody knows Trump is _______”. Just fill in the blank, and it is TRUE, right?
They are attempting right now to depose Trump using the 25th amendment using these false consensus (created public opinion) as proof of Trump’s unfitness.
This is sedition, This is a crime of the highest order. And it is a open conspiracy that further illuminates the conspirators as they are so brazen to not care who knows. Corruption at the highest level.
Yeah, all of that sounds very plausible, but since most of the leaks are coming from the Republican White House, it sort of undermines your point.
We’ll have to wait until Mueller concludes his investigation, and of course whatever verdict he comes to the other side will claim it is “fake news”. So then we have to trust Mueller’s integrity.
My take is that the crowd attacking Mueller’s integrity *before* the result comes out is the most scared.
Leaks coming out of the Republican White House….you mean like Comey? The white house is/was packed tight with progressive lifers. Look at the voting results for DC if you have any doubt how many working in and out of the white house support Trump.
Mueller was seen as largely neutral UNTIL:
Comey was fired and leaked confidential conversations, and everyone realized that Comey and Mueller were best buds,
And he hired ALL Democrat investigators, some who worked for Clinton and others who are heavy democrat donors. Fair and balanced?
And you BET people are worried as the independent investigator can run this thing for YEARS while a continual drip drip drip of unverifiable leaks eats away at Trump’s credibility.
There is no justice in DC. If there was it would be Hillary being investigated for her server, for her foundation and for her DNC rigging of the primaries……but you don’t care….do you. The progressive “intent” defense again.
“Comey was fired and leaked confidential conversations, and everyone realized that Comey and Mueller were best buds,
And he hired ALL Democrat investigators, some who worked for Clinton and others who are heavy democrat donors. Fair and balanced?”
As I said, you can tell who is really worried by who is already attacking Mueller before he has released anything.
And let’s remember who appointed him – a Republican DOJ leader.
We will find out soon enough from Mueller what happened. I’m ready to accept it based on the evidence provided. I’ll bet you will as well, and sing his praises if he exonerates Russia and 45. Mueller and his team so far have been pretty tight ship – it seems that leaks happen when they start asking for documents or want to talk to people – again mostly coming from the White House.
I find this hilarious, and the more frantic 45’s fanboys get, the funnier it is.
“As I said, you can tell who is really worried by who is already attacking Mueller before he has released anything.”
As i recall, in July 2016, Comey laid out a case against Hillary, then said there was no case. Who wouldn’t be worried in a politicized environment? I don’t trust Mueller any more than Comey should have been trusted to seek justice.
Or you could just listen to Mish: “Healthy skepticism is sorely needed. Instead, news agencies opt for drama and fake open mindedness on Russia.”
Anybody with any sense is waiting for Mueller to conclude his investigation. The news agencies have pixels to color and airtime to fill and their audience wants “drama” as Mish says.
If you want speculation, my best guess is that the Russians sponsored fake news but would not trust 45 and his clown show and therefore didn’t collude with them. He is their useful idiot, but they are too smart to trust him to keep his mouth shut for a millisecond. They probably fell out of their chairs if Kushner actually did suggest a secure back channel hidden from U.S. intelligence and assumed they were being played by the CIA.
Time will tell, and then we’ll see if Mish maintains his open mind or darts into a partisan bubble.
Is that you Acosta?
If it isn’t, you should contact CNN and hit them up for a researcher position – no sense in wasting your talent on blogs like this.
I hear they are hiring!
Regards,
Cooter
No, I’m the monosynaptic. Anyway, CNN can’t afford me – at least not their research department.
CNN is just a split screen with 4 to 10 people shouting nonsense at each other – who watches any of these “news” channels? They picked up the Fox formula and applied it to the 60% of people disgusted with 45 and his venal entourage. They have a token 45er who the rest get to shout at. Some of the people at work tell me about how “their guy” really put it to the “Trump” guy and showed him what for. It is just like the Fox viewers who get excited when the “libtard” is put down.
Toby Smith had an article detailing his role at Fox as the “hit man”.
Pathetic.
“Dan Rather was the father of fake news. The FACT that the documents were FAKE, in no way effects the veracity of the story…right?”
No it doesn’t. The story either happened or didn’t happen.
Suppose you had an affair on your wife 5 years ago. I can’t prove it so I forge a love letter from your alleged mistress to you. You can prove the letter is a forgery thereby demolishing my evidence but that doesn’t magically make it so the affair didn’t happen.
Rather never created the document, it was shopped to him by someone pushing it either for fame, money, to make trouble etc.
There is the actual truth … and the truth one can prove.
If the truth falls in the forest and no one believes it …
You have to be quite naive to believe that Rather got the Bush AWOL document as he and his producer claimed. Come on, man. Lucy Ramirez behind the fried dough truck at the Texas State Fair is exactly what you’d say if you cooked up the document on your own computer the very morning you claimed to have discovered it.
There it is, the inevitable conclusion, thanks to Brian: Putin did it!!
Dang twicky wussians.
maddow is irrelvant.
i am not sure why anyone cares what she has to say.
has she ever said anything of value? e.g. improved anyone’s life or solved a problem?
she should get as much attention as a dog pissing on a hydrant.
Modern media in many regards is less about its stated objective – in this case reporting news – and more about controlling how people think.
Making money is part of the deal, but these companies are acquired by those with an interest in paying a “stupid tax” so they can control how stupid people think.
Bezos bought the WP – not to make money – but to influence how people think. He could care less if it makes money (nice if it does, but not the primary objective). By influencing thinking, he makes his return some place else.
I have said for years, among friends, that reality will become so far removed from the BS that is sold that one day folks realize it en masse – and that is exactly what is happening.
Is anyone a choir boy at the national political level? Of course not. But it doesn’t excuse the deeply lopsided media reporting of many subjects which frankly are sowing the seeds of their own destruction.
The right just doesn’t have the kind of one sided reporting – on the scale the left does – so as media loses credibility, the left is going to be the biggest loser. In fact, it appears they depended on it so much – and The Donald understood that weakness well – that he is kicking the legs out from under their entire political table.
I have no love for the R’s either – truth be told – they can’t even repeal Obamacare – just a bunch of losers.
Curious to see what Trump does with them.
Regards,
Cooter
I watched Rachel on election night just to see the tears in her eyes as she realized that Hillary couldn’t steal the election. Bonus: the old plagiarist Doris Kearns Godwin babbling on about FDR (prolong the depression, get caught with his pants down at Pearl Harbor and throw 125,000 people into internment camps to satisfy his racism) and JF K (steal the election with the help of the Mafia, wiretap Martin Luther King, give us McNamara, Rusk and 55,000 dead in Vietnam).
58,300 dead, officially. If you count the MIAs/POWs left to die, with no shortage of help from Hanoi Johnny to play down the fact that there were any well into the 1980s, well over 59k dead.
It doesn’t matter what they do if no one watches. sponsors will pay less for advertising. We may see changes once att takes over unless they just sell the whole thing to Soros.
AT&T management must have a death wish for the company, buying up the fake news media for so much money when AT&T is already overleveraged. Makes as much sense as AOL’s ill-fated merger with Time-Warner. AT&T seems to think they need to own the content for their content transmission business. Idiocy raised to the nth power. Will no doubt lead to big bonuses before management bails.
Super cheap money and hordes of dumb investors have this effect on boards.
Regards,
Cooter
And the investors aren’t really investors any longer, just people indexing. I’ve been index investing for about two decades now and it has worked out for me. I worked with the major trading firms on Wall St and the City selling risk management software and decided I didn’t want them any where near my money – at the time index funds were much smaller.
Now index funds are where the money is, so all the “smart” guys at GS, etc. will be trying to figure out how to game indexing. I can’t see a better vehicle for my investments that provide the same returns with the minimal skills I possess in this area, so am hoping that the whole market is too big for them to game. Mind you, I thought that about LIBOR as well and look how that turned out.
We’re spending a lot of time haranguing over Maddow’s fake document/fake news story when we should know by now not to pay her any attention.
Meanwhile, we do know Comey leaked a private conversation with the president to The NY Times. Also, Republican pols were unmasked by Susan Rice while the Obama Administration was surveillance the Russians during the 2016 campaign. This all goes for naught. Why is that?
Republicans have spent decades learning to yield to the media. The fear the media the way a child fears an abusive father, still giving respect as they see no other choice. Republicans believe that they CANNOT fight the media. For years they have been called every foul name and accused of every foul deed by the media. It doesn’t really matter what Maxine Waters or Chuck Schumer says UNLESS the media covers it AND gives it veracity. And it doesn’t matter how much truth there might be in Republican actions,as they KNOW they will be called racists, told they want people to die, push granny off the cliff, whatever, and the media will play it as truth. For that reason they will not go after democrat corruption and illegality as the media will play it as petty politics…or worse. Isn’t that what Bernie tells us about his wife’s investigations. Didn’t Susan Rice claim that her detractors were misogynists and racists, same as Obama, Holder, Clinton, Lynch and all the others. The leftist media did not question those claims, simply repeated them as fact, just as they did with Trump and his supporters being called racists, misogynists and instigators of violence.
Republicans KNOW how the system works and they want to exist within it, accepting it as it is. Trump has sought to change that paradigm and it scares the shit our of ALL of them. People voted for Trump to see these corrupt politicians held to account, and it’s not about politics, it’s about justice. People see little justice in their lives, many times the simplest of oversights (crimes) wrecking their lives, while they see someone like Hillary that EVERYONE KNOWS would have ended up in PRISON if the same rules had been applied to her that apply to the rest of us.
Poor babies. Are the media being bad to you. Fetch me the World’s smallest violin. The media attack everybody, some attack one side more than the other, some are pretty much neutral and attack all sides – that is what we want from our news – entertainment and scandal. Live with it. Everybody else has to without blubbing all day.
90% of all people working in media vote democratic and support democrats. The major progressive media outfits are located in heavily progressive areas. They have come out publicly admitting their bias, bragging of it as a credential to their MORALS, that they see it as their RESPONSIBILITY to stop Trump in any and ALL actions, and remove him from office if possible.
The media is NOT entertainment, it is disinformation propaganda in support of an agenda and it has gone on for years, only now finally fessing up to their real motivations. Progressives like yourself will go on for months about the “threat” of Russian election interference, while completely ignoring the fact that the very media that supposedly the Russians used to dissuade people from voting for Hillary have been absolutely complicit in doing everything within their power to defeat Trump in his election and agenda.
For you to claim anything else makes you a complete liar or a fool. You should quit while you are ahead.
CAPITALS don’t make you sound more CREDIBLE, they make people think you are a TEENAGER. Of course, the content of your posts belies even that level of maturity, but keep trying laddie.
Like the snowflakes on college campuses who want their safe spaces (remember when you called for me to be barred from this board for my micro-aggressions against you), you are exhibiting a severe case of “I’m a victim, poor me, the media doesn’t print what I think it should”.
The media is as good as you pay for. If you want to watch CNN or Fox News for free (unless you value your time regarding commercials), you get entertainment designed to trap eyeballs for their sponsors – enjoy but verify. I pay for my news, and it isn’t cheap, but there are some very good value sources – BBC is the cost of a cable subscription, which you are probably paying for anyway. The Economist, while relatively expensive, should go down well with the libertarian bent of the Mish crowd, so long as you can put up with the scientific approach to reality they subscribe to. Science is another publication of value.
Or you can listen to the voices in your head. Cheap, and, again, you get what you pay for. In your case a refund might be in order, even though you got your brain for free.
Man, you’re not half as smart as you think. You do know that you can’t watch cable news for free, right? It’s called ‘cable’ for a reason, m’kay? And even free TV isn’t free if they have advertising. So, thanks but no thanks: the media is a disgrace and we’ll keep on talking about it. If you want to play your tiny violin that just shows you don’t have the brain matter to understand the issue.
I am precisely 1/10th as smart as I think I am. I have a wife and multiple kids explaining this to me on a continual basis, so you are really only piling on. But you are right, mea culpa, you need basic cable to get CNN. Frankly, I wouldn’t bother but I need my sports fixes.
FYI – doesn’t my user name give my self assessment of my intellectual skills away? Maybe I’m being too clever … 😉
Crime is now determined by INTENT, and that intent is determined by the progressive media. Progressives always have only the best of intentions, so when they “inadvertently” break a few laws, it is forgiven by the court of public opinion (as defined by the progressive media). And with regard to Hillary, Comey made it quite clear there was NO INTENT to do anything bad. There WAS INTENT to break the law,,,but that’s okay because the law was simply an obstruction for a progressive to “do good”.
Now Republicans on the other hand, are known devils, with nothing but selfish ill intent, so there is really not much purpose in even delving into the intent question as they are just BAD people, or at least dumb, which is not an excuse for republicans, but for progressives, #1.
Progressives, possibly flawed but well meaning.
Conservatives, GUILTY AS CHARGED.
Hopefully this explains it for you. It may sound sarcastic, but it is NOT. It is EXACTLY how progressives see it. You can find many places where progressives just point blank state that they feel that all conservatives are idiots and/or evil. And what’s better still is that while making this acknowledgement, also admit that there goal is to USE that ignorance and greed for THEIR purposes. They admit that they need us for productivity and the wealth that they drain off to advance their agenda..an agenda that would be IMPOSSIBLE without us. And they go further to suggest that the automation trend that is costing us our jobs is seen as their “final solution”, meaning that they won’t need us anymore.
As a business owner/manufacturer, I use automation where reasonable, so I am not against technology, but we must recognize AND acknowledge our reality. Businesses that survive will have no choice but to go along with the progressive agendas in all their forms. AS proof, look for businesses today who openly support conservative principles who are not punished for it. This will only get worse if progressives have their way. They will do all in their power to shut you down if you fail to follow the program.
But… The Intercept’s posted version was redacted (per Maddow it was at the spooks’ request) and the one received in Maddow’s inbox was not. Maddow also explained that they were also NOT otherwise (besides the redactions) identical, but the “forger” (presumably someone in the administration laying a journo-trap) appeared to use The Intercept’s version as a template.
Are you sure it wasn’t the Russians?
Roughly half the country voted for Trump, and I feel certain that more than one or two is smart enough to do this (if it is actually a “journo-trap”), but naturally it was the “administration” doing it.
Do you not think for a moment that there are just as many (if not more) people who hate this progressive media and their brain dead snowflakes than there are antifa and generally but-hurt progressives, that are NOT in the administration?
Nope, Trump DID IT, or his Russian “handlers”.
If only you could see how sad this is.
The average curmudgeon wouldn’t have access to seized espionage evidence, nor the exact same printer used to print it. Someone within government would. If would seem you haven’t seen the MSNBC report you’re commenting on.
And Rachel ends up with mud on her face once again,
For how long will MSNBC tolerate her boneheaded investigative blunders that backfire and embarrass the network?
Maybe they can trade her to CNN for Wolf Blitzer.
Cannot believe that there isn’t someone qualified to take over Maddow’s time slot. Wonder if she has dirt on MSNBS insiders, or props up their miserable ratings with her 25 viewers and 200 fake accounts on Twitter.
Goodbye MSNBS.
Don’t count your chickens – look how long O’Reilly pedaled his nonsense, and Sean “Even I don’t claim I’m a journalist” Hannity is still spouting drivel.
Maddow will be judged on ratings. The only media that is judged on reality is media where people will pay for well researched reality. The Economist isn’t cheap, but it is worth it to avoid the emotional claptrap that dominates Fox, CNN and MSNBC. The Economist knows that their journalistic integrity drives their subscriptions which are vital to their business model, so any errors need to be admitted and corrected.
You’re pretty much wasting your time with American TV media at the moment – the only show I bother with is BBC News.
The complaint about the general public being manipulated is perennial – it was the tabloids before Fox News took the model onto cable and proved that there is a dumb watching audience as well as a dumb reading audience. In medieval times there were probably complainers whining about the Town Criers who were spreading misinformation.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
Ha! Very entertaining Mono.
One caveman looks at another caveman at Lascaux, points to the cave wall and says, “Can you believe this bullshit?!”
And so on.
Please don’t waste anymore pixels in this toilet dweller. She is just not Worthy!
This is worth a read
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/06/09/remarks-president-trump-regulatory-relief