In Vanity Fair, Ken Stern peers into the murky depths of the right-wing media bubble:
Virtually every day during the past year, I’ve digested a daily dose of Breitbart, the alt-right Web site that many journalists, including myself, have described as “Trump Pravda.” A typical day on Breitbart includes any number of articles extolling the rise of Donald Trump, including the massive size of his rallies and (on and off) his fast-rising poll numbers. There are also several pieces attacking the “mainstream media,” usually CNN, The New York Times or The Washington Post. Recently, there have been a slew of pieces from the Clinton WikiLeaks cache, which are part of a larger set of articles showcasing the couple’s venality, arrogance, and sexual peccadillos. The reporting, such as it is, is generally factually accurate, but mean-spirited and fantastically one-sided. If Breitbart were your primary news source, you would receive a view of the election that would be largely distorted and wholly unrecognizable to swaths of the American public.
When I checked the news the other day, it was more of the same. I counted some 20 articles about the presidential race, each espousing the unequivocal view that one candidate is collapsing due to moral failings, financial improprieties, and complete and utter lack of judgment and ethics. Notably, I was not reading Breitbart. Instead, I was reading The Washington Post, delivered to my doorstep, and the attacks were squarely waged not against the Clintons but rather against Trump.
In the Front Section, there was an incredible array of Trump-phobia, ranging from attacks on his business acuity to his ethics (“How Trump got a personal tax break by defaulting on loans”), to his personal knowledge (“Trump’s map of black America needs an update”), to stupid opinions about Trump (“Nader predicts fastest impeachment in history for a President Trump”), to smart opinions about Trump (“A contemptible candidate — and the party to blame for it”).
If you think this is limited to the National News portion of the paper, you would be mistaken. The Metro section, which typically reports on the Washington, D.C. area, was headlined by a news article describing the dysfunction at the Trump campaign in Virginia and a column arguing that Trump watching should be rated R for children. The top article in the Style section sported a massive feature on the Trump meltdown, supplemented by a column attacking Steve Bannon, the C.E.O. of the Trump campaign and the former head honcho at Breitbart. The sports section featured a column attacking Trump and defending, of all things, locker-room culture. Only the Health section lacked a Trump hook. (Trump, as you may recall, temporarily banned WaPo reporters from his campaign events.)
Rather remarkably, there was virtually no mention of Clinton or any other candidate running for president on this particular day. And so I repeated this little thought experiment again last week and the results were largely the same. The Post should not be blamed for criticizing a candidate who has demonstrated xenophobic, racist, and sexually predatory behavior. But even at the end of perhaps the worst stretch of weeks for a candidate in modern American electoral history, perhaps 45 percent of the electorate, some 55 million voters or so, still will vote for Trump. And some of them may wonder if the Post put their fat thumbs on the electoral scales.
“Ken Stern is the president of Palisades Media and the former C.E.O. of NPR. He is the author of the forthcoming book, Republican Like Me.”
RINO, like so many elite “conservatives” out there. Can’t conceive that the media bias is real? Think that Breitbart is an echo chamber but the NYT and WaPo have only become so? And the rest of the mainstream media, so balanced and fair, right? He is the token “republican” at the liberal dinner parties. Politely accepted to show how worldly they are, he is the pet RINO. Like a dancing bear perhaps one day he will recognize his plight and strike out at his handlers, but until then they will let him write his stories to show how balanced they are… look, he wrote a Vanity Fair article, they aren’t all liberals there… or are they?
Comment by Dwayne — November 5, 2016 @ 18:49
Oh, give the poor guy a break: not only is he the only Republican all his liberal friends know, he’s probably the only Republican that he knows! Never having actually encountered any living, breathing conservatives, he probably imagines himself to be the heart and soul of the right. Even libertarians have generally had contact with other libertarians, but a “conservative” in a deep blue state? They’re so rare that it’s no surprise they’ve become virtually extinct.
Comment by Nicholas — November 6, 2016 @ 09:39