Hillary Clinton doesn’t need the media, and it’s driving the media crazy

[applegrove]

Hillary Clinton doesn’t need the media, and it’s driving the media crazy

by Jonathan Allen at Vox

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/20/8628513/Hillary-Clinton-doesnt-need-media

"SNIP...............


Almost all presidential aspirants need the media to build their name ID and their credibility as candidates, to amplify their ideas, and to crush their rivals. Without the amplification of "earned media" — such as newspaper articles and television appearances that they don't pay for — it's hard to convince voters, and early donors, that they are serious contenders for their party's nomination or the presidency.

Candidates could spend years knocking on doors and not get the boost they get from a network television segment. There is, of course, a risk, too. When they mess up in interviews, they often do real damage to themselves before they gain traction with voters. Just ask Jeb Bush about the perils of going on Fox News and talking about the Iraq War. They are usually willing to take the gamble because they can't pass up the potential benefits of media attention.

The media can also be a useful weapon in tearing down other candidates. Whether that comes in the form of opposition research slipped to a reporter or simply from a rival self-destructing, there's great advantage to be gained when the media spotlight is trained on another candidate.

For Clinton, the equation is different. Everyone knows her. She's a credible candidate. She could get breathless coverage for announcing a new policy on the importation of edelweiss. And she doesn't have any serious competition for the Democratic nomination. The guy running against her, Bernie Sanders, has pledged not to go negative. It's hard to make up ground that way. The less Clinton talks to the media, the easier it is for her to make sure all that remains true. There's much less for her to gain from talking to reporters and much more for her to lose.



................SNIP"

[JaneyVee]

1. Sorry, media, no one wants this horse race started 19 months out.

No one is looking forward to the constant barrage of tv ads, telephone calls, and knocks on the door. Your time will come. But not now.

[woo me with science]

39. More manipulative corporate messaging. *Hillary* is the one who chose to start her campaign now.

See post 37. Hillary has no right to complain that anyone is forcing her to speak too early. *She* chose to declare her candidacy now.

For an honest candidate genuinely interested in representing voters, that would mean that it's time for her to be communicating with voters, laying out a clear agenda, and responding to questions about that agenda.

Instead, we get this manipulative campaign of talking points not only EXCUSING her hiding from voters, but twisting this utter lack of accountability to voters into some Orwellian noble act of circumventing a corrupt media.

What utter horseshit. If she were truly concerned about corrupt media, she would be doing exactly what Bernie is doing: Insisting on reaching voters despite them. Confronting the media publicly on their games and refusing to play them. Rejecting their framing and communicating about her agenda despite their attempts to impose other framing.

She is doing exactly the opposite. She is *using* them as an excuse to do what corporate candidates always do....insulate herself from voters and run a slick, vapid ad campaign instead.

This is why Bernie is such a breath of fresh air. He is reminding American citizens what we have a right to expect from candidates in a representative political process. He is laying out an agenda and making himself available to answer detailed questions about it. He is showing respect for voters and respect for his accountability to them as someone applying to be their representative. Slimy. arrogant games of avoidance like Hillary is playing out right now have become so commonplace in our corporate-corrupted system that people had *almost* forgotten what a real representative process is supposed to look like.

Almost.

But Bernie is reminding us. And by sheer contrast he is showing us how empty of content, how manipulative, and how full of contempt for us the election process has become in the hands of corporate politicians. This is the difference between real representation and corporate election theater.

Thank goodness we have Bernie. What a stunning contrast between democratic representation and the sham representation of oligarchy.

[99Forever]

49. Spot on observations, Woo.

It almost seems to be a no-brainer, if you don't want to be questioned, don't run for public office.

Thinking you can make real criticisms go away with a wave of the Royal Hand won't cut it in America.

[JaneyVee]

50. Yeah because spending time on the ground with voters...

Instead of with corporate media is a terrible thing? Please, if she spent the next 19 months talking to the media you would be complaining "she's being shoved down our throats", "crowding out other Dem candidates", and "Clinton fatigue". And by the way, please find me where Hillary complained about being forced to talk. Go ahead, I'll wait.

[peacebird]

57. Is she attending 'open' events or only speaking to people handpicked by her campaign?

That would make a difference to me in whether she is really listening to average Americans, or whether she is in a bubble of supporters.

[JaneyVee]

58. I'm sure it's a mix of both. There is no way to gauge who is a supporter.

What's the screening process, do you support Hillary? To which anyone can just lie anyway.

[peacebird]

59. It would be interesting to see what the screening process is for campaigns....

Seriously. I had not thought about how they vet who is a supporter before. i wonder if you are right and they just ask?

[JaneyVee]

60. There's definitely secret service involved.

[peacebird]

61. For Hillary, of course. But for, say,Bernie, or O'Malley, or any of the R's (except maybe Jeb Bush)?

[brooklynite]

51. Along with every other candidate...

...And the folks here who think the campaign's too early are spending endless amounts of time discussing it.

[SidDithers]

52. ...

Sid

[Agschmid]

2. Good read, kick.

[Rex]

3. Fuck the M$M. nt

nt

[hrmjustin]

4. The media is out to get Hillary but she will knows how to handle them.

[NYC_SKP]

5. Her numbers are falling, others' are climbing.

[Thinkingabout]

7. What is the source of this chart?

[MADem]

26. When they won't give you the source, it's a reason to suspect it.

The last dire chart was rife with misspellings and came from "Pinterest" -- so, whatever.

It's coming from an image hosting site. Can't find a copy anywhere else on the net, either.

Things that make ya go ... hmmmmmm.

[MaggieD]

14. This doesn't jibe with current polling I've seen

Why no source or link?

[Flying Squirrel]

25. Here ya go

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

The latest chart doesn't look like the one above, I see Hillary basically level (with small fluctuations +/- 3%) at 62.3 %, Elizabeth Warren still rising slowly (currently 12.4%), Sanders rising more sharply (currently 10.6%) and Biden declining slightly at 9.4% as of May 18.

I see no need to post disingenuous information, Hillary is currently doing just fine and any other candidates have a long way to go. I am encouraged by the double digits and trend line for Sanders however.

[MaggieD]

27. Bernie is 14.9 in the picture above

So how is his current 10.6 a "rise?"

[Flying Squirrel]

29. I'm agreeing with you that the picture above

Does not match the information I found at pollster.com

[bunnies]

68. Thats because NYC_SKP poll is the NH primary...

Not the national.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-new-hampshire-presidential-democratic-caucus

[Blue_Adept]

48. Agenda driven posting versus fact driven posting

I used to like believing that Democrats were fact based. But a lot of what we post around here is pure agenda, much of which is without basis in fact. Especially in regards to primary material.

[MaggieD]

63. You took the words right out of my mouth

I remember when I could proudly say we Democrats were realists. But not here. Honest to god, I used to think the right had a corner on the market of la la land. Learn something everyday, I guess.

[Thinkingabout]

6. She was ask questions this week, they were not questions in which can reveal her agenda, same

useless question which would be ask over and over, why answer these over and over. If the press wants access to Hillary they need to change the same old, same old questions. In her case the press does not help and she is doing much better on the meet up with citizens.

[Raine1967]

8. It's a sticky widget.

She needs the media. I despise M$M. ANY and ALL candidates need media.

The fact that everyone knows her is a double edged sword and that is why she needs the media. She can be a candidate that is available to media or one that puts her advocates out there as a representative for her. Either way, media and politics go hand in hand.

She is polling well, and that is a good thing for her candidacy. To assume that media is not something she needs is really bad optics.

Also, Vox is the media. There is something strange about a media outlet saying this.

[1939]

47. And if you goad the media

Look at what happened to Gary Hart. If the media gets angry and goes on a massive campaign to dig up dirt......

[KMOD]

9. It's a little early in her campaign to be worried about the media's feelings.

She answered their questions yesterday, and did a good job of it.

[Doctor_J]

10. That explains why they're treating her like royalty

It's a lot like 1999-2000 when W was the ordained one. Amusing, but very unhealthy for the democracy we used to live in. Our billionaire media really like these royal families, and vice-versa

[eloydude]

11. The less exposure is actually benefiting Bernie..

Clinton being non-existent to the media shows that she is being "insulated" from the "harmful environment" for Hillary's world... The more Bernie beats down the media which he has been doing lately, the more the people learn about Bernie because the media will have *NO* other choice but to report on Bernie as a rising alternative to Clinton.

[AtomicKitten]

19. Next to Bernie's openness, the more she looks like a coward ducking scrutiny.

[Agschmid]

44. Bernie is "beating down the media"...

Funny, he appears to just be trying to get as many interviews as possible. I'm not sure I consider that bearing them down, also beating people down isn't really the way Senator Sanders works. In general he is more of a supportive guy...

[msongs]

12. she is under no obligation to acknowledge that pack of jackals, who should be digging up TPP

copies and posting those...like real journalism

[MaggieD]

13. LOL - I must be a genius

Since that's exactly what I said just a few days ago. Or it's just that obvious (except to the HRC haters).

[BrotherIvan]

15. Oh my god YOU'RE A GENIUS!!!!!

[MaggieD]

20. It would be more satisfying...

... If the bar weren't set so low. LOL!!

[BrotherIvan]

22. I know right

You're playing chess while we're all playing checkers. I mean, we just don't GET you. It must be so lonely.

[MaggieD]

24. It's not "me" you don't get

[BrotherIvan]

28. Do tell

[Cha]

17. You did say that.. and, it's only logical.. but, those grasping at any angle.. want her to give

the US Cropmediawhores' interviews.. Right Effin' NOW. But, they also posted that President Obama is a "Trojan horse"... so, the least that can be said is.. it belongs in the freaking trash can.

[MaggieD]

21. Good analysis

[Cha]

32. "Hillary is doing exactly the right thing by focusing directly on voters," said a former Democratic

communicator who did not work for her."

President Obama drives the US "media" Crazy, too.. they're always Whinging about him. He knows how they are and learned to go to alternative media. Doing a Great job, too.

[azureblue]

33. MS. Clinton is being very wise

She is well aware that the media wants to turn this into a battle of personalities, scandals, and gotchas. She knows they will stay away from asking relevant questions on issues that actually affect the people of this country. The media has also shown instances of trying to diminish her by objectifying her as a woman. What I predict is this: she and Bernie will wind up in a debate. They will refuse to reduce themselves to the 7th grade intelligence level the media loves so much, they will refuse to be baited into attacks on each other or respond to attempts to turn the campaign into personality issues. Instead, they will stick to talking about what the people of this country need, and what their plans are to address that. And the media will be stunned because they have forgotten how civil, intelligent people talk.. And it's time we do that here. We have two great candidates, and they each have their own strengths. The GOP has doofuses.

[AndreaCG]

69. Well said

Let's hope for intelligent debates including all our candidates. (I figure O'Malley and Webb too.)

[Hekate]

31. GMTA. The media has devolved into a pack of sharks sniffing for chum & this is way early....

....in the campaign process.

HRC has an entire clown car of GOP candidates running against her instead of each other, and the media would just love to "get her reaction" to this, that, and the other. When they're bored, which is often, they bring up ancient disproven "scandals" or more recent disproven "scandals." Or they just make stuff up.

In what universe is Hillary obligated to respond to any of this?

Not to mention the nonsense at DU, where we should be running against the Republicans instead of trying to kill off our own.

[Cha]

34. I'm thinking she has the experience with the US corpmedia to know better and perhaps learned from

President Obama's experience, too.

He learned and started by passing them for alternative news sources.. driving the US "media" to crazy whining!

[leftofcool]

41. It's obvious, Maggie and was so from the beginning.

It is so nice to see Hillary out talking to real people instead of ranting and raving on social media.

[freshwest]

16. Bernie Sanders, has pledged not to go negative,' because he's against giving the WH to the GOP...

That's what we need, not doing opposition research for the GOP. Unless it doesn't matter to those doing it all the time.

Let's not go there in informing others on our candidates, let's show ourselves to be as much people of principle as we believe our candidates are.

What this says may grant us the victory Obama gave us in 2012. It was satisfying seeing O'Reilly wailing about people given no voice by MSM that came out of nowhere and overcome Mitt. To get this country back on the correct path, this is what we need, all of those voiceless ones making their voices heard.

[betsuni]

18. Every time I see something about Clinton on the MSM it's stupid stuff about emails and money.

Ten wasted minutes yesterday on PBS Newshour. Somebody from the Washington Post blathering on about "OMG, like, Hillary made money giving speeches and it was bazillions of dollars you guys, which is RARE unless, like, you already were president or something, and it was to tech companies that, you know, would totally tell Hillary what to do for sure probably." Gwen Ifill said "It's also rare for a First Lady to run for president" and then asked if there was any hint of even borderline illegal activity. WP post said, "Well, um, no, but er ... it RAISES QUESTIONS." Then Wall St. Journal mumbled things about email and Benghazi and that a miracle happened when Clinton answered questions the other day, but when asked if she'd answer questions she said, "Well, I'll do it if I can learn something." After the show Gwen had a sip of something she keeps hidden in the bottom drawer of her desk.

Anyone who tries to convince us that the media considers Clinton "royalty" or "anointed" or "ordained" is barking up the wrong tree on purpose for some reason. Woof woof.

[MaggieD]

23. You should catch this thread....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6703796

"The Hill" breathlessly contrasted Bernie's speaking fees with Bill and Hillary's. Except they forgot to add that senate rules prohibit Bernie from taking speaking fees.

Thread died when I posted the senate ethics rules. LOL!

[betsuni]

30. Thanks, hadn't seen that. Yeah, you put that thread to bed and tucked it in tight.

Good job!

[azureblue]

35. more work

by America Rising employees... They put together this stuff right out of the GOP playbook, a small fact, a larger half truth, then innuendo, then guilt by dissociation, then a wild accusation, all wrapped in "Concern". and it can be spotted a mile off.

[leftofcool]

42. Oh darn! I missed that one.

[Hekate]

36. I love Gwen Ifill too. Your rendition of her guests is spot on, LOL. nt

[woo me with science]

37. MANIPULATION VS. REPRESENTATION....Why would a "candidate" from the oligarchy need the media?

Only candidates in democratic, representative systems need reach the people, lay out a clear policy agenda, and respond to questions about that agenda.

Corporate fake candidates of an oligarchy have no such responsibility, no such need. All they need to do is get their slick advertisements out there and trust that their propaganda machines are out there drumming home manipulative messages rationalizing their utter lack of accountability to the people. Maybe even cynically PRAISING it, along the lines of Orwell's mouthpieces praising the increase in the chocolate ration.

Honesty versus manipulation. What ugly manipulation we get from corporate candidates who are replacing the fundamental responsibility of politicians to be accessible and accountable representatives, with this fake democracy of protected, unreachable politicians and manipulative ad campaigns.

[Agschmid]

45. Off the deep end.

[woo me with science]

46. No, not off the "deep end" at all. We live in oligarchy now....But you know that.

Last edited Thu May 21, 2015, 07:44 AM - Edit history (2)

Corporate money floods Washington, buys politicians, and buys policy.

US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study
http://www.businessinsider.com/major-study-finds-that-the-us-is-an-oligarchy-2014-4
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024819356

The policies coming out of Washington have borne little to no resemblance to what the people want and need for some time now. The predatory, antidemocratic TPP that Hillary helped draft and that Obama is now pushing is an excellent example.

So is the drumbeat of insulting, denial and diversion-filled corporate propaganda that now pollutes our media down to message boards on the internet.

Corporate politicians don't like to talk publicly about policies, because they know the policies they actually intend to enact are predatory toward the 99 percent. They have built a corporate media that focuses on fluff, diversion, and shiny corporate ads, instead. And a drumbeat of insulting talking points denying it all. Let's repeat:

US Is an Oligarchy Not a Democracy, says Scientific Study
http://www.businessinsider.com/major-study-finds-that-the-us-is-an-oligarchy-2014-4
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024819356

That's why the policies of corporate-corrupted politicians in BOTH parties look like this:

Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
"Looking forward" and letting war criminals off the hook? Both parties support it.
Deciding torturers are patriots? Both parties support it.
Militarized police and assaults on protesters? Both parties support it.
Indefinite detention? Both parties support it.
Drone wars and kill lists? Both parties support it.
Targeting of journalists and whistleblowers? Both parties support it.
Private prisons replacing public prisons? Both parties support it.
Unions? Both parties view them with contempt.
Trillion dollar increase in nuclear weapons. Both parties support it.
New war in Iraq. Both parties support it.
New war in Syria. Both parties support it.
Carpet bombing of captive population in Gaza. Both parties support it.Austerity for the masses? Both parties support it.
Cutting social safety nets? Both parties support it.
Corporatists in the cabinet? Both parties support it.
Tolling our interstate highways? Both parties support it.
Corporate education policy? Both parties support it.
Bank bailouts? Both parties support it.
Ignoring the trillions stashed overseas? Both parties support it.
Trans-Pacific Job/Wage Killing Secret Agreement? Both parties support it.
TISA corporate overlord agreement? Both parties support it.
Drilling and fracking? Both parties support it.
Wars on medical marijuana instead of corrupt banks? Both parties support it.
Deregulation of the food industry? Both parties support it.
GMO's? Both parties support it.
Privatization of the TVA? Both parties support it.
Immunity for telecoms? Both parties support it.

That is why the corporate media is trying to hard to marginalize and ignore Bernie Sanders, and that is why the filthy propaganda machine is needed. The oligarchs want political candidacies to be exactly as Clinton is running hers: empty, content-free theater driven by ads. Bernie, by contrast, is laying out an agenda, talking to voters, answering our questions. He is calling out the corrupt system, reminding us by example what a representative political process is supposed to look like, and growing a national movement to demand better.

Ignore Third Way Talking Points and Spin
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025767160

[Thinkingabout]

53. If you took some time to read Third Way stand on the issues you just might like them, if you

continue to read the talking points and glaze over the truth then you will not know what the Third Way is trying to do to help working people.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

67. I'd say you're tearing the mask off but

considering the howls of pain coming from some quarters I'd say you actually got hold of their second face.

[FlatBaroque]

64. Your posts are so thoroughly informative and contributory to the learning process.

Thanks for all you do.

[Agschmid]

66. I try...

[FlatBaroque]

65. I don't think I have ever read any journalist or commentor

who has grasped the entire set of our current circumstances than you. I applaud you for your eloquent and fearless commentary. You have educated thousands of people. I consider myself extremely aware and well informed, yet every time you post I learn something. I thank you so very much.

[Cha]

38. Quote from MalcomX on the "media"..

jesseWilliams.
✔ ‎@iJesseWilliams
"Media is the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty & the guilty innocent. That's power." #MalcolmX
9:24 AM - 19 May 2015 3,079 3,079 Retweets
2,419 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2015/05/19/a-tweet-or-two-288/

[daredtowork]

40. Inviting "Breathless" GOP Candidate Coverage?

I seem to recall expecting a coronation being Hillary's problem in 2008. If she's telling the media to go elsewhere for their stories, it looks like she's trying to win by doing 2008 over. Go figure.

[bemildred]

43. If Hillary doesn't need the media how is she going to spend all that money? nt

[NCTraveler]

54. It is a great decision by her.

Right wingers attempted to make an issue of it and it backfired. Love it.

[BeyondGeography]

55. The MSM has mercifully been diminished in this country

It had an incredible platform and squandered it on bullshit. It became purely profit driven in the 80s and the combination of lowest common denominator "journalism" and new technologies that broke their hold on news and information has been devastating.

Don't tell them though. The big newspapers and networks still have an over-inflated sense of their importance and seem continually taken aback when ignored.

Ignore them. They are looking to tear down anyone who would do the boring work of building something decent in this country. Covering issues just doesn't move the needle like rumor and innuendo.

[leveymg]

56. Ignore the media, ignore your critics within the Party - a prescription for defeat.

What incredibly stupid advise, if translated into a campaign strategy.

[workinclasszero]

62. Funny seeing Bernie fans taking the MSM/Fox"news"/teabag side

Every damn time Hillary's name comes up.