Monday, 24 October 2016
Saturday, 22 October 2016
Media should rethink coverage in wake of Brexit vote, says Justin Webb
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/jul/05/media-should-rethink-coverage-in-wake-of-brexit-vote-says-justin-webb
"Webb said some people who campaigned to remain in the EU had felt let down by the media’s coverage of the debate before the the historic poll result on 23 June. “A discussion about holding people to account, a discussion about impartiality in the modern era, is one I suspect the broadcasters would rather welcome, if only to sort out their own thinking,” the BBC’s former North America editor, wrote in the Radio Times. “And it should not be a discussion left to newsrooms and editorial offices and university journalism departments: it really should matter to us all. “One of the clearest messages during the referendum campaign was that audiences were hungry for real knowledge. People wanted to go beyond claim and counter-claim so that they could work out what was true.”
BBC TV’s failure to properly scrutinise Boris Johnson’s EU claims a ‘criminal act’
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jun/29/tvs-failure-to-properly-scrutinise-boris-johnsons-eu-claims-a-criminal-act
The Oscar-winning film producer Lord Puttnam has criticised the BBC’s coverage of the EU referendum as “constipated” and accused broadcasters of a “criminal act” by not putting the claims of leading Brexit campaigner Boris Johnson under more scrutiny.
The Oscar-winning film producer Lord Puttnam has criticised the BBC’s coverage of the EU referendum as “constipated” and accused broadcasters of a “criminal act” by not putting the claims of leading Brexit campaigner Boris Johnson under more scrutiny.
The Price I’ve Paid for Opposing Donald Trump
Trump’s alt-right trolls have subjected me and my family to an unending torrent of abuse that I wouldn’t wish on anyone.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441319/donald-trump-alt-right-internet-abuse-never-trump-movement
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441319/donald-trump-alt-right-internet-abuse-never-trump-movement
Friday, 21 October 2016
Presidential Lies
Presidents lie, and their lies all too often end in disillusion, prosecution, or blood. To skim the greatest hits of American fabrication from the Oval Office is to shudder at the shameless gall of the speakers:
New Yorker
Post and the New York Times.
In recent weeks, reporters and the fact-checking department at The New Yorker have put their efforts into a series of reported essays about Trump and lying. No one here is suggesting that Trump is the only politician ever to unleash a whopper. In fact, Hillary Clinton has had her bald-faced moments—moments that are too kindly described as “lawyerly.” But, in the scale and in the depth of his lying, Donald Trump is in another category; this effort, which begins with Eyal Press’s essay on Trump and immigration and will continue every week through the election, is by way of keeping track of a record that appears to know no bounds, and certainly no shame.
“The first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, in so far as possible, the killing of civilians.”“I’m not a crook.”“In spite of the wildly speculative and false stories of arms for hostages and alleged ransom payments, we did not—repeat, did not—trade weapons or anything else for hostages. Nor will we.”“Read my lips. No new taxes.”“I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
New Yorker
No President has not lied, even Lincoln. Honest Abe once said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”
But sometimes there really is something new under the political sun. Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for President, does not so much struggle with the truth as strangle it altogether. He lies to avoid. He lies to inflame. He lies to promote and to preen. Sometimes he seems to lie just for the hell of it. He traffics in conspiracy theories that he cannot possibly believe and in grotesque promises that he cannot possibly fulfill. When found out, he changes the subject—or lies larger.
We are not alone in noticing this characteristic of Trump’s. It has been the central preoccupation of much of the decent journalism produced in the past year. Trump’s capacity for lying inspires equal parts awe and revulsion. Even journalists raised in the Nixon era cannot but be impressed. The accounting is revealing and requires updating on a daily basis. Fact-checking sites such as Politifact have focussed an intelligent lens on Trump, and so have many excellent reporters from the Washington
Post and the New York Times.
Trump himself is perfectly aware of his habits of mind. In “The Art of the Deal,” a book he claims to have written but did not, he cops to being a master of “truthful hyperbole”:
You have to understand where I was coming from. While there are certainly honorable people in the real-estate business, I was more accustomed to the sort of people with whom you don’t want to waste the effort of a handshake because you know it’s meaningless.
Those sentences, like all the other sentences in “The Art of the Deal,” were ghostwritten by Tony Schwartz, who recently, in these pages, denounced Trump as pathologically unfamiliar with the notion of truth. “Lying is second nature to him,” Schwartz told Jane Mayer. “More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true.”
In recent weeks, reporters and the fact-checking department at The New Yorker have put their efforts into a series of reported essays about Trump and lying. No one here is suggesting that Trump is the only politician ever to unleash a whopper. In fact, Hillary Clinton has had her bald-faced moments—moments that are too kindly described as “lawyerly.” But, in the scale and in the depth of his lying, Donald Trump is in another category; this effort, which begins with Eyal Press’s essay on Trump and immigration and will continue every week through the election, is by way of keeping track of a record that appears to know no bounds, and certainly no shame.
Read the series here:
Eyal Press writes about Trump on Immigration and Crime
Adam Davidson on Trump and the Unemployment-Rate Hoax
Adam Gopnik on Trump and Conspiracy Theories
Adam Davidson on Trump’s Interest-Rate Flip-Flops
Eyal Press writes about Trump on Immigration and Crime
Adam Davidson on Trump and the Unemployment-Rate Hoax
Adam Gopnik on Trump and Conspiracy Theories
Adam Davidson on Trump’s Interest-Rate Flip-Flops
Notes
Rosen
"If journalists are to rise to the occasion in the final six weeks of this campaign, they will have to find a style of coverage as irregular as Trump’s political style. There are powerful forces working against this. But if they don’t try, they are likely to regret it for the rest of their careers
Jarvis
has been a vocal critic of how the press has covered this presidential election, as well as an enthusiastic supporter of Hillary Clinton. On his blog, he’s asserted that political journalism currently fails to “inform and cultivate an educated, empathetic, [and] engaged society.”
His proposed alternative? "...A journalism that mirrors the many and diverse communities and concerns in societies and convenes these communities in dialog so they can foster empathy and understanding."
That ideal journalism may not be possible between now and Nov. 8, but there are changes news organizations could make. Here are some of his suggestions.
News organizations often plan out their election coverage well in advance. I suspect there will be debriefs and retrospectives on how news outlets have covered this election — but I'm curious if it's possible for them to change their coverage plans midstream, and, if it is, how they should do so given this election is so radically different.
[Atlantic contributing editor] Norm Ornstein,
who has been performing good press criticism on Twitter
Example: "Treat Trump as possible president, examine in detail and not once his business dealings, his foundation, relationships."
Melody Kramer : News organizations should ask how every report and every minute of a journalist's time helps voters make more informed decisions. The rest — predictions of who will win, advice on what candidates must do to win, scoring debates and speeches, commenting on performance, following fake scandals into the ground, interviewing surrogates — is just, as [New York University professor] Jay Rosen says, their attempt to look savvy. It's not helpful. It doesn't inform. It's not journalism.
Inside Facebook’s (Totally Insane, Unintentionally Gigantic, Hyperpartisan) Political-Media Machine
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/magazine/inside-facebooks-totally-insane-unintentionally-gigantic-hyperpartisan-political-media-machine.html?_r=0
Now 36, Provost helps run US Uncut, a left-leaning Facebook page and website with more than 1.5 million followers, about as many as MSNBC has, from his apartment in Philadelphia. (Sample headlines: “Bernie Delegates Want You to See This DNC Scheme to Silence Them” and “This Sanders Delegate Unleashing on Hillary Clinton Is Going Absolutely Viral.”) He frequently contributes to another popular page, The Other 98%, which has more than 2.7 million followers.
Provost’s page now communicates frequently in memes, images with overlaid text
In an image posted shortly thereafter, a photo of Bernie Sanders was overlaid with a quote: “If Germany, Denmark, Sweden and many more provide tuition-free college,” read the setup, before declaring in larger text, “we should be doing the same.” It has been shared more than 84,000 times and liked 75,000 more.
Now 36, Provost helps run US Uncut, a left-leaning Facebook page and website with more than 1.5 million followers, about as many as MSNBC has, from his apartment in Philadelphia. (Sample headlines: “Bernie Delegates Want You to See This DNC Scheme to Silence Them” and “This Sanders Delegate Unleashing on Hillary Clinton Is Going Absolutely Viral.”) He frequently contributes to another popular page, The Other 98%, which has more than 2.7 million followers.
Provost’s page now communicates frequently in memes, images with overlaid text
In an image posted shortly thereafter, a photo of Bernie Sanders was overlaid with a quote: “If Germany, Denmark, Sweden and many more provide tuition-free college,” read the setup, before declaring in larger text, “we should be doing the same.” It has been shared more than 84,000 times and liked 75,000 more.
Hyperpartisan Facebook Pages Are Publishing False And Misleading Information At An Alarming Rate
https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/partisan-fb-pages-analysis?utm_term=.yo61Nv5XQ#.hjyRGBlPM
Hyperpartisan political Facebook pages and websites are consistently feeding their millions of followers false or misleading information, according to an analysis by BuzzFeed News. The review of more than 1,000 posts from six large hyperpartisan Facebook pages selected from the right and from the left also found that the least accurate pages generated some of the highest numbers of shares, reactions, and comments on Facebook — far more than the three large mainstream political news pages analyzed for comparison.
The rapid growth of these pages combines with BuzzFeed News’ findings to suggest a troubling conclusion: The best way to attract and grow an audience for political content on the world’s biggest social network is to eschew factual reporting and instead play to partisan biases using false or misleading information that simply tells people what they want to hear. This approach has precursors in partisan print and television media, but has gained a new scale of distribution on Facebook. And while it isn’t a solely American phenomenon — the British Labour party found powerful support from a similar voice — these pages are central to understanding a profoundly polarized moment in American life.
Hyperpartisan political Facebook pages and websites are consistently feeding their millions of followers false or misleading information, according to an analysis by BuzzFeed News. The review of more than 1,000 posts from six large hyperpartisan Facebook pages selected from the right and from the left also found that the least accurate pages generated some of the highest numbers of shares, reactions, and comments on Facebook — far more than the three large mainstream political news pages analyzed for comparison.
The rapid growth of these pages combines with BuzzFeed News’ findings to suggest a troubling conclusion: The best way to attract and grow an audience for political content on the world’s biggest social network is to eschew factual reporting and instead play to partisan biases using false or misleading information that simply tells people what they want to hear. This approach has precursors in partisan print and television media, but has gained a new scale of distribution on Facebook. And while it isn’t a solely American phenomenon — the British Labour party found powerful support from a similar voice — these pages are central to understanding a profoundly polarized moment in American life.
Thursday, 20 October 2016
Media and Politics in the Age of Trump
Victor Pickard is an Associate Professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication where he studies the history and political economy of media.
the news media's primary goal is not to distribute information to the public but to garner ratings and revenues. Here, he traces the history of how profit undermined public service in the news media.
https://origins.osu.edu/article/media-and-politics-age-trump
https://origins.osu.edu/article/media-and-politics-age-trump
News media’s constant coverage has boosted Trump’s visibility and helped popularize him, even in aggressive confrontations with the candidate. The benefit, however, is mutual.
As Trump attacks the press—mocking and feuding with journalists, threatening to change libel laws, holding campaign events where reporters are corralled and roughed up—he still serves the media well. That’s because the news organizations covering Trump, particularly television news, are reaping incredible amounts of money from their election coverage. Cable news organizations are expected to make a record-breaking $2.5 billion this election season.
This profit motive helps explain the constant media exposure of Trump that greatly advantaged his campaign over his competitors’, especially in the primary season’s early days.
A study on newsworthiness calculated that, during 2015, Trump received 327 minutes of nightly broadcast network news coverage, compared with Hillary Clinton’s 121 minutes and Bernie Sanders’ 20 minutes. The New York Times reported that Trump received nearly $2 billion in free media coverage during his primary campaign. As the Republican nominee for president, he’s since become even more ubiquitous.
As Trump attacks the press—mocking and feuding with journalists, threatening to change libel laws, holding campaign events where reporters are corralled and roughed up—he still serves the media well. That’s because the news organizations covering Trump, particularly television news, are reaping incredible amounts of money from their election coverage. Cable news organizations are expected to make a record-breaking $2.5 billion this election season.
This profit motive helps explain the constant media exposure of Trump that greatly advantaged his campaign over his competitors’, especially in the primary season’s early days.
A study on newsworthiness calculated that, during 2015, Trump received 327 minutes of nightly broadcast network news coverage, compared with Hillary Clinton’s 121 minutes and Bernie Sanders’ 20 minutes. The New York Times reported that Trump received nearly $2 billion in free media coverage during his primary campaign. As the Republican nominee for president, he’s since become even more ubiquitous.
10 facts about the changing digital news landscape
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/14/facts-about-the-changing-digital-news-landscape/
About four-in-ten Americans now often get news online.
About four-in-ten Americans now often get news online.
Mobile is becoming a preferred device for digital news
Long-form journalism has a place in today’s mobile-centric society.
More than half (55%) of U.S. smartphone users get news alerts, but few get them frequently.
Social media, particularly Facebook, is now a common news source.
- Overall, 62% of U.S. adults get news on social media, and
- 18% do so often
- However, news plays a varying role across the social networking sites studied.
- Two-thirds of Facebook users (66%) get news on the site, which amounts to
- 44% of the general population.
- Nearly as many Twitter users say they get news on Twitter (59%), but
- due to Twitter’s smaller user base this translates to just 9% of the general population.
Art of the Lie
Post Truth – Post Fact and "Truthiness"
- Barack Obama’s birth certificate was faked,
- the president founded Islamic State (IS),
- the Clintons are killers
- and the father of a rival [Ted Cruz] was with Lee Harvey Oswald before he shot John F. Kennedy.
“Mr Trump is the leading exponent of “post-truth” politics—a reliance on assertions that “feel true” but have no basis in fact. His brazenness is not punished, but taken as evidence of his willingness to stand up to elite power.” Economist September 10 2016
The Economist goes on to argue:
But post-truth politics is more than just an invention of whingeing elites who have been outflanked. The term picks out the heart of what is new: that truth is not falsified, or contested, but of secondary importance. Once, the purpose of political lying was to create a false view of the world. The lies of men like Mr Trump do not work like that. They are not intended to convince the elites, whom their target voters neither trust nor like, but to reinforce prejudices.
Feelings, not facts, are what matter in this sort of campaigning. Their opponents’ disbelief validates the us-versus-them mindset that outsider candidates thrive on. And if your opponents focus on trying to show your facts are wrong, they have to fight on the ground you have chosen. The more Remain campaigners attacked the Leave campaign’s exaggerated claim that EU membership cost Britain £350m ($468m) a week, the longer they kept the magnitude of those costs in the spotlight.
Sunday, 16 October 2016
How scheming ratbags spread lies on social media
Francis Wheen - here in the Spectator
It’s a safe bet that any post starting ‘What the mainstream media won’t tell you’, or words to that effect, will refer to something that has in fact been extensively reported in the ‘MSM’. And so it is here. I’m reproducing this Anonymous meme because a lovely Facebook friend of mine posted it, and it struck me that this is how many lies are spread on social media: scheming ratbags taking advantage of decent people’s better natures. After all, from what Anonymous say about William Kamkwamba he sounds great, so let’s sabotage the media conspiracy of silence by sharing his story.
It’s a safe bet that any post starting ‘What the mainstream media won’t tell you’, or words to that effect, will refer to something that has in fact been extensively reported in the ‘MSM’. And so it is here. I’m reproducing this Anonymous meme because a lovely Facebook friend of mine posted it, and it struck me that this is how many lies are spread on social media: scheming ratbags taking advantage of decent people’s better natures. After all, from what Anonymous say about William Kamkwamba he sounds great, so let’s sabotage the media conspiracy of silence by sharing his story.
The Fury and Failure of Donald Trump
Win, lose or drop out, the Republican nominee has laid waste to the American political system. On the trail for the last gasp of the ugliest campaign in our nation's history
There's an old Slavic saying about corruption: One thief sits atop another thief, using a third thief for a whip. The campaign trail is similarly a stack of deceptions, with each implicit lie of the horse race driving the next.
Lie No. 1 is that there are only two political ideas in the world, Republican and Democrat.
Lie No. 2 is that the parties are violent ideological opposites, and that during campaign season we can only speak about the areas where they differ (abortion, guns, etc.) and never the areas where there's typically consensus (defense spending, surveillance, torture, trade, and so on).
Lie No. 3, a corollary to No. 2, is that all problems are the fault of one party or the other, and never both. Assuming you watch the right channels, everything is always someone else's fault.
Lie No. 4, the reason America in campaign seasons looks like a place where everyone has great teeth and $1,000 haircuts, is that elections are about political personalities, not voters.
http://www.rollingstone.com/
Friday, 14 October 2016
Turkey Brexit Disinformation Misinformation Mistake or what ever it might be
Where it begins:
In an article on the front page of the Observer Turkey and its people are clamed for lawlessness and as a threat to the NHS
It is the eve of the launch of a new Vote Leave poster about Turkey
Mordaunt:"We have to be honest about the cost of EU membership for our public services today and in the future: and particularly what this will mean for the NHS unless we take back control and Vote Leave on 23 June.”
upto 2'20 then from 7'54" to end.
00.01 22 May 2016: Express
'Turkish migrants to CRIPPLE the NHS' Brexit minister's stark WARNING about EU ascension
A MOVE to let Turkey join the EU will put the NHS under huge strain unless Britain quits the bloc, a minister has warned.
Penny Mordaunt last night said Turkish ascension could cost under-pressure maternity services nearly £400million in 10 years.
The Vote Leave campaigner pointed to high Turkish birth rates – 17.4 per 1,000 people compared to 12.1 in Britain in 2014.
She is also concerned about Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia being allowed to join the trading bloc.
22 May 2016: Independent
Tory minister Penny Mordaunt 'plain and simple lying' over Turkey joining EU
Andrew Marr suggested this was wrong, given “the British government does have a veto on Turkey joining, so we don’t have to let them join”.
But Ms Mordaunt replied: “No, it doesn’t. We are not going to be able to have a say.”
Marr was forced again to bring up the issue at the end of the interview to clarify Ms Morduant’s point. He said: “I’m going to return to this business, because I’m pretty sure that we do have a veto over stopping Turkey joining if we want to. Are you sure that we don’t?
Then where it moves from Fact to Truthiness: 7'56"
Ms Mordaunt said: “We haven’t… I think that with the current situation, the migrant crisis and other issues in Europe at the moment, we would be unable to stop Turkey joining.
“I think this is a matter for the British people to decide, and the only shot that they will get to express a view on this is in this referendum… I don’t think that the UK will be able to stop Turkey joining.”
22 May 2016: ITV
Cameron: 'Turkey joining the EU is not remotely on the cards'
Turkey joining the EU is not currently "remotely on the cards", David Cameron has said.
The prime minister also told ITV's Peston on Sunday the EU referendum was more important than a general election.
Mr Cameron attacked Armed Forces Minister and Leave campaigner Penny Mordaunt after she said that it's "very likely" Turkey will join the EU in the next eight years.
Mr Cameron said he "wanted to make it very clear" Britain has a veto on another country joining the EU.
Run Video - "Pave the road from Ankara to Brussels"
23 May 2016: UK Front Pages
http://www.thepaperboy.com/uk/daily-express/front-pages-today.cfm?frontpage=46029
23 May 2016: Russia Today
'You can’t trust Cameron': Brexiteers back Army minister Mordaunt over Turkey EU claims
Brexit campaigners, however, rallied around Mordaunt. The official ‘Leave’ campaign tweeted: “You can’t trust David Cameron on Turkey” during Mordaunt’s BBC interview, in which she warned 1 million Turks would settle in the UK as a result of Turkey’s imminent accession to the EU.
Express carries the story - Start has a sports story England beating Turkey
Wikipedia:
Claim about vetoes on EU accession[edit]
During an interview on BBC Television, Mourdant denied that the UK had a veto on Turkey joining the EU – despite Article 49 of the EU constitution requiring a unanimous vote of all 28 members of the General Council to allowing accession of a candidate state – thus creating a power of veto by a dissenting member nation. Prime Minister David Cameron stated her view was "completely wrong"[28] and Guy Verhofstadt called her statement "contemptible".[29]27 September 2016: Telegraph
Boris Johnson says Britain will now help Turkey join EU despite using prospect to help win referendum
Boris Johnson says Britain will now help Turkey join EU despite using prospect to help win referendum
During the EU referendum Mr Johnson warned that the accession of Turkey would give millions of migrants the right to live and work in the UK. The claim was one of the most controversial of the referendum campaign and led to accusations by senior Remain campaigners that Mr Johnson had lied.
But yesterday, during his first official visit to Turkey, Mr Johnson said that Britain will "help Turkey in any way" now that it is leaving the EU.
9 June 2016: Independent
Boris Johnson and Michael Gove 'deliberately lying to voters over Turkish migration', Yvette Cooper says
Ms Cooper labelled the Brexit campaigners’ conduct “utterly shameful”, claiming that both men had stoked up concerns about the free movement of people from Turkey, despite knowing that it would not be joining the EU in the near future.
9 June 2016: Huffington Post
‘How Can Boris Johnson Live With Himself Over Turkey EU Lies?’ Asks Yvette Cooper In Passionate Attack
“They know that Cyprus would veto it, they know that Greece would veto it. They know it hasn’t fulfilled any of the conditions and on human rights it is going backwards."
14 July 2016: Huffington Post
Boris Johnson: ‘May God Help Him’ Warns Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim
When asked if he had any messages for the former London Mayor, Yildirim replied: “May God help him and reform him, and I hope he won’t make any more mistakes and tries to make it up with the Turks.”
While Nato member Turkey has applied to join the bloc, only one of the 35 chapters required to do so has been fulfilled, with former Prime Minister David Cameron predicting the process will not be complete until the year 3,000.
30 September 2016: Vanity Fair (Henry Porter)
Boris Johnson’s Latest Move Would Make Trump Blush [Use photo] September 30, 2016
Let me explain. After much agonizing and calculation, this spring, Johnson opted to join the “Leave” campaign and become a leading voice in the movement’s quest to depart from the E.U. The decision seemed both motivated by political opportunism—if Leave triumphed, after all, Johnson might succeed David Cameron as prime minister—and unabashedly brazen. One of Johnson’s chief scare tactics involved evoking the threat of Turkey joining the E.U., which would allow its 76 million citizens, the vast majority of whom are Muslim, freedom of movement across the European Union. During the campaign, Johnson’s associates published a map depicting Turkey, Syria, and Iraq in various shades of red as though the latter two states were also set to join the E.U. The “Remain” campaign and Cameron condemned the map for its dishonesty, but it was too late. It was very influential in the charged atmosphere that last summer led Britain to turn away from Europe.
Johnson, who incidentally has Turkish ancestry, ruthlessly leveraged the possibility of Turkey’s membership even though, in these times of migration and terror, the country has slightly less chance of joining the E.U. than Vanuatu.
Saturday, 8 October 2016
Fact check: This is not really a post-fact election
Here in WaPo
So voters want more fact-checking. But is it making any difference? Do people change their minds when faced with a fact check that surprises them, or do they internalize only fact checks that suit their own biases? Our understanding of basic psychology suggests that fact checks are often read with a partisan eye.
Often, but not always. A new working paper by Brendan Nyhan of Dartmouth College and Jason Reifler of Exeter University, who have studied fact-checking extensively, indicates that readers can learn from fact checks. Nyhan and Reifler conducted a survey of a representative panel of 1,000 Americans to gauge their general knowledge, party preferences and attitudes toward fact-checking. They then took participants who accepted a follow-up invitation to be studied further and split them into two groups. One half received nine fact checks; the other half was the control group and received placebo content in the form of PR releases. Lo and behold, participants in the “treatment” group scored far better when asked factual questions related to the content they read than those in the control group. Balance, Trump and Lies
Here in NY Times
Confronted by this, the basic questions for the press have been: If covering Trump is also providing free advertising — more than $2 billion worth — should he be covered less or not at all? If Trump is outside the frame of conventional political discourse, how far outside the frame of conventional coverage does the media have to move? And if his evident personal problems render him unfit for the presidency, is it more important to ensure by any means that he is not elected or to be critical of Hillary Clinton where justified?
In other words, is any equivalence of treatment of the candidates “false” because they are not compatible, any more than, say, harassment and murder are compatible crimes?
Peter Thiel’s Lawyer Isn’t Stopping His War on Journalists
Here on Gizmodo
Silicon Valley billionaire and Donald Trump delegate Peter Thiel has defended his legal attack against Gawker Media by claiming the company “routinely published thinly sourced, nasty articles that attacked and mocked people.” At the same time, he has insisted that reporters should not be alarmed by his role in destroying an independent media outlet. “It’s precisely because I respect journalists that I do not believe they are endangered by fighting back against Gawker,” he told the New York Times.
Silicon Valley billionaire and Donald Trump delegate Peter Thiel has defended his legal attack against Gawker Media by claiming the company “routinely published thinly sourced, nasty articles that attacked and mocked people.” At the same time, he has insisted that reporters should not be alarmed by his role in destroying an independent media outlet. “It’s precisely because I respect journalists that I do not believe they are endangered by fighting back against Gawker,” he told the New York Times.
Ethics will be as central as economics to the future of the news industry
LSE Blog
The whole process of journalism has been reconfigured. The means of gathering, creating and disseminating news has been changed by technological transformations that mean the way news is consumed and paid for have also been profoundly altered. We now have more smartphones than people in the world, connected to a global internet that allows citizens to access, share and create news for themselves. No longer gatekeepers, journalists and the news organisations they work for find themselves as nodes and channels within a networked information framework where new digital players such as Google, Facebook or Buzzfeed are arguably more significant than the BBC, CNN, or the New York Times.
The whole process of journalism has been reconfigured. The means of gathering, creating and disseminating news has been changed by technological transformations that mean the way news is consumed and paid for have also been profoundly altered. We now have more smartphones than people in the world, connected to a global internet that allows citizens to access, share and create news for themselves. No longer gatekeepers, journalists and the news organisations they work for find themselves as nodes and channels within a networked information framework where new digital players such as Google, Facebook or Buzzfeed are arguably more significant than the BBC, CNN, or the New York Times.
CNN finally puts that annoying breaking news banner to use, begins live fact-checking Donald Trump
Trump’s latest lie, that he had never said Japan should develop nuclear weapons, was boldly called out by CNN in real time on Thursday. During the June 2 edition of CNN’s “At This Hour With Berman and Bolduan,” correspondent Jason Carroll reported that Trump recently claimed that he never said he wants Japan to get nuclear weapons.
Here
Here
Lies, Damn Lies and Viral Content
More
Craig Silverman‘s new report, Lies, Damn Lies and Viral Content, is a must-read for any journalist or editor who works with fast-moving news. You can download it here (pdf).
At the end of last year, Gawker editor Max Read published a memo outlining the strategy and priorities for the site in 2015.
“Already ankle-deep in smarmy bullshit and fake ‘viral’garbage, we are now standing at the edge of a gurgling swamp of it,”he wrote.
Read’s direction to staff was to avoid being yet another site rushing to post viral stories. The goal, he said, was to be “a trusted guide to the overwhelming new Internet, your escort through and over the bog of Facebook and Twitter, your calibration tool for the cycle of incident and outrage and parody social-media account. What’s actually happening here? Is this story news? Is that photo real?”
This strategy runs counter to the approach many news websites currently take when it comes to viral content, online rumors and unverified claims. They scour the web and social media for anything that might generate traffic, and work to get it up and promoted as a fast as possible. Verification and context are someone else’s job, should they choose to do it.
Craig Silverman‘s new report, Lies, Damn Lies and Viral Content, is a must-read for any journalist or editor who works with fast-moving news. You can download it here (pdf).
At the end of last year, Gawker editor Max Read published a memo outlining the strategy and priorities for the site in 2015.
“Already ankle-deep in smarmy bullshit and fake ‘viral’garbage, we are now standing at the edge of a gurgling swamp of it,”he wrote.
Read’s direction to staff was to avoid being yet another site rushing to post viral stories. The goal, he said, was to be “a trusted guide to the overwhelming new Internet, your escort through and over the bog of Facebook and Twitter, your calibration tool for the cycle of incident and outrage and parody social-media account. What’s actually happening here? Is this story news? Is that photo real?”
This strategy runs counter to the approach many news websites currently take when it comes to viral content, online rumors and unverified claims. They scour the web and social media for anything that might generate traffic, and work to get it up and promoted as a fast as possible. Verification and context are someone else’s job, should they choose to do it.
Wednesday, 5 October 2016
The truth about ‘post-truth politics’
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/the-truth-about-post-truth-politics/
According to Michael Deacon, the Telegraph’s political sketchwriter, she was an ideal candidate because she embodied the ‘anti-factual’ mood of the country. ‘Facts are negative,’ he wrote, parodying the attitude of Leadsom’s knuckle–dragging supporters. ‘Facts are pessimistic. Facts are unpatriotic.’
According to Michael Deacon, the Telegraph’s political sketchwriter, she was an ideal candidate because she embodied the ‘anti-factual’ mood of the country. ‘Facts are negative,’ he wrote, parodying the attitude of Leadsom’s knuckle–dragging supporters. ‘Facts are pessimistic. Facts are unpatriotic.’
Lessons gleaned from 30 years of covering American politics—from Bill Clinton to Donald Trump
Don’t lose sight of your mission. A reporter’s job is to get as close to the truth as possible, overriding personal biases and sifting through a rising churn of spin and lies to explain what happened and why it matters. At its highest levels, journalism informs (via scoops and insights that would otherwise be unknown), provokes (via new thoughts and action), and holds powerful people accountable (with no fear or favour)
You’re not working for your editors, other reporters on your beat, or your sources. You’re working for the public, your audience, which is why you don’t slip acronyms, anonymous quotes, and other insidery detail into your stories just to impress folks on your beat. Also, remember for whom you work when you’re rewriting a press release or broadcasting a spoon-fed story for the wrong reasons—“because I’ve got to keep them happy” or “I’ve got to show them I’m relevant, that I’m the reporter they come to.” That’s how you become a patsy. It’s not how you develop sources.
Post-truth politicians such as Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are no joke Jonathan Freedland
Post-truth politicians such as Donald Trump and Boris Johnson are no joke
In this era of post-truth politics, an unhesitating liar can be king. The more brazen his dishonesty, the less he minds being caught with his pants on fire, the more he can prosper. And those pedants still hung up on facts and evidence and all that boring stuff are left for dust, their boots barely laced while the lie has spread halfway around the world.
The proof is on show most visibly in the US, where Republican nominee-to-be Donald Trump enjoys a relationship to the truth that is chilly, occasional and distant. The Washington Post’s fact-checker blog has awarded its maximum dishonesty rating – four Pinocchios – to nearly 70% of the Trump statements it has vetted. And it’s vetted a lot. That doesn’t mean the other 30% turned out to be true. They just earned three Pinocchios rather than the full four, which means the Post found a shrivelled kernel of veracity wrapped inside the thick layers of fraud, distortion and deception.Post-truth politics
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-truth_politics
Post-truth politics (also called post-factual politics) is a political culture in which debate is framed largely by appeals to emotion disconnected from the details of policy, and by the repeated assertion of talking points to which factual rebuttals are ignored. Post-truth differs from traditional contesting and falsifying of truth by rendering it of "secondary" importance.[1] The contemporary origin of the term is attributed to blogger David Roberts[2][3] who used the term in 2010 in a column for Grist. It became widespread during the 2016 presidential election in the United States and the 2016 referendum on membership in the European Union in the United Kingdom.[4][5] Political commentators have identified post-truth politics as ascendant in American, Australian, British and Indian politics, as well as in other areas of debate, driven by a combination of the 24-hour news cycle, false balance in news reporting, and the increasing ubiquity of social media.[6][7][8][9][10]
Post-truth politics (also called post-factual politics) is a political culture in which debate is framed largely by appeals to emotion disconnected from the details of policy, and by the repeated assertion of talking points to which factual rebuttals are ignored. Post-truth differs from traditional contesting and falsifying of truth by rendering it of "secondary" importance.[1] The contemporary origin of the term is attributed to blogger David Roberts[2][3] who used the term in 2010 in a column for Grist. It became widespread during the 2016 presidential election in the United States and the 2016 referendum on membership in the European Union in the United Kingdom.[4][5] Political commentators have identified post-truth politics as ascendant in American, Australian, British and Indian politics, as well as in other areas of debate, driven by a combination of the 24-hour news cycle, false balance in news reporting, and the increasing ubiquity of social media.[6][7][8][9][10]
Trump’s latest lie, that he had never said Japan should develop nuclear weapons, was boldly called out by CNN in real time on Thursday. During the June 2 edition of CNN’s “At This Hour With Berman and Bolduan,” correspondent Jason Carroll reported that Trump recently claimed that he never said he wants Japan to get nuclear weapons.
Trump attacks Clinton: CNN's Reality Check Team inspects the claims
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/22/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-speech-fact-check/
Donald Trump on Wednesday gave a major speech attacking presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, and CNN's Reality Check Team put the billionaire's statements and assertions to the test.
Donald Trump on Wednesday gave a major speech attacking presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, and CNN's Reality Check Team put the billionaire's statements and assertions to the test.
The team of reporters, researchers and editors across CNN listened throughout the speech and selected key statements, rating them true; mostly true; true, but misleading; false; or it's complicated.
News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2016
http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/
A majority of U.S. adults – 62% – get news on social media, and 18% do so often, according to a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted in association with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. In 2012, based on a slightly different question, 49% of U.S. adults reported seeing news on social media.1
A majority of U.S. adults – 62% – get news on social media, and 18% do so often, according to a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted in association with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. In 2012, based on a slightly different question, 49% of U.S. adults reported seeing news on social media.1
Media Exclusive: Is Donald Trump’s Endgame the Launch of Trump News?
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/donald-trump-tv-network
Trump, this person close to the matter suggests, has become irked by his ability to create revenue for other media organizations without being able to take a cut himself. Such a situation “brings him to the conclusion that he has the business acumen and the ratings for his own network.” Trump has “gotten the bug,” according to this person. “So now he wants to figure out if he can monetize it.”
Hope Hicks, Trump’s spokeswoman, adamantly denied that such conversations have occurred. (“There is absolutely no truth to this whatsoever,” she told me. “This hasn’t been even uttered. Not even thought about.”) Then, after conferring with Trump, she issued a subsequent statement clarifying her point: “While it’s true Mr. Trump garners exceptionally high ratings, there are absolutely no plans or discussions taking place regarding a venture of this nature.” Meanwhile, someone close to Kushner has suggested that Trump would be unlikely to go so far as to seek out a partner at this stage of the race, given that it might risk alienating many of the established media players that he has outflanked—and that he is relying on to get him elected. (Such a move would also inevitably raise issues regarding the F.C.C.’s “equal-time” rule.)
Trump, this person close to the matter suggests, has become irked by his ability to create revenue for other media organizations without being able to take a cut himself. Such a situation “brings him to the conclusion that he has the business acumen and the ratings for his own network.” Trump has “gotten the bug,” according to this person. “So now he wants to figure out if he can monetize it.”
Hope Hicks, Trump’s spokeswoman, adamantly denied that such conversations have occurred. (“There is absolutely no truth to this whatsoever,” she told me. “This hasn’t been even uttered. Not even thought about.”) Then, after conferring with Trump, she issued a subsequent statement clarifying her point: “While it’s true Mr. Trump garners exceptionally high ratings, there are absolutely no plans or discussions taking place regarding a venture of this nature.” Meanwhile, someone close to Kushner has suggested that Trump would be unlikely to go so far as to seek out a partner at this stage of the race, given that it might risk alienating many of the established media players that he has outflanked—and that he is relying on to get him elected. (Such a move would also inevitably raise issues regarding the F.C.C.’s “equal-time” rule.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)