Monday, September 26, 2016

The Real Ones To Watch Tonight.

AYellowerShadeOfPale
JournalismFailingVille


Me?

I won't really be watching what Mr. Trump and Ms. Clinton do or say because we already pretty much know what that will go (i.e. bombast vs. policy).

Instead, I will be watching the proMedia afterwards.

Why?

Well, how about we let Krugzilla explain...

"...If the media report on the debates the way they did in 2000 – if substance is replaced by descriptions of Clinton’s facial expressions, her sighs, or how she “comes across,” while downplaying Trump’s raw lies, say hello to the Trump White House. And history will not forgive the people who made it possible..."



OK?

_____
Monday afternoon update...Bloomberg says it is going to fact-check on-screen...I think I just found my network of real time choicyness...

.

13 comments:

sd said...

Your right, I remember how they focused on Gores facial expressions and not on the shrub. I do think that Hillary already knows this and will be ready(I sure as hell hope)! This stuff is starting to scare me as so many people have been hoodwinked by this racist.

sd said...

Well, well,well, looks like the orange sniffer couldn't control his pie hole or body language(let alone say something truthful). I feel better. Now on to 2017.

RossK said...

sd--

I think we've got to wait 48hrs to see how the herd plays it re: conventional wisdomry.

.

Anonymous said...

You pretty much nailed it. It was bombast vs policy. The post-media analysis gave the debate to Clinton, but they made it sound much closer than it really was. I thought Trump came across as an idiot and had no policy, whereas Clinton's responses were mostly clear and concise policy statements.

Anonymous said...

Make that post-debate analysis by the media, not post-media analysis. I guess I'd better go get that first cup of coffee now.

RossK said...

Anon-Above--

Was interesting that both-sider pundit extraordinaire Chuck Todd was derisive about both candidates saying that Trump was exposed as being unprepared while Clinton appeared 'at times' to be over-prepared.

Which begs the question....How, exactly, is being over-prepared a bad thing in a president?


.

Beth said...

I listened on the radio to the debate, I just cannot look at that man anymore and his orange complexion. I thought Trump came across like a thug, a goon! my friend kept count of how many times he interrupted Ms. Clinton and the moderator... 57 times!, and what was going on with all that sniffing ? he was all over the map last night nothing was making much sense from him after a while..... perhaps I might have more criticism in regard to Clinton and her responses if she had been debating someone in her caliber, and as for that remark about his income tax and not paying any it seemed to me a similar remark from an old film clip I watched of Al Capone just before he was led off to Alcatraz for tax evasion. the common people loved that man as well. very scary that Trump is even a consideration in the upcoming election

RossK said...

Thanks for your impressions Beth--

And I agree, the radio is much better for this sort of thing.

I had it on the box, with window hidden while doing some work. It does help to keep the blood pressure down when you can't see that particular fellow.


.

Lenin's Ghost said...

When it's sounding like it comes from a can like a factory made boy band.

Lenin's Ghost said...

As much as I am disgusted with trump, Clinton is the continuation of the governance of the corporate elite and the beating down of the masses. It's a no win situation. At some point the breaking up of the pro-corporate trade policies needs be done. But, trump! Fuck!

Willy said...

The great American turd tasting contest.Which turd tastes better? Bernie should run as an independent.

RossK said...

LG and Willy--


Not to go all Diana Ross on you all or anything, but...

The Supremes.


.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of corporate media...

Right-wing newspaper owners want your taxes to subsidize their obsolete, mismanaged, biased publications - by David Climenhaga
http://albertapolitics.ca/2016/09/right-wing-newspaper-owners-want-taxes-subsidize-obsolete-mismanaged-biased-publications/