CNN: Media is fact-checking Trump on terror and, maybe, doing him a favor

[Amaryllis]

Was President Trump's declaration that the media is deliberately not covering terror attacks in Europe another example of his off-the-cuff, fact-free pronouncements? Or more evidence that he and his team understand how to exploit the press?

Maybe it's both.

The White House has been losing the public relations fight over its ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries since the weekend of its chaotic implementation. It will keep losing that fight so long as the story of the ban is 5-year-old refugees trapped in war-ravaged Syria; translators who worked for years alongside American soldiers, risked their lives for them, and are now shut out of the United States; and families torn apart.

But if the story changes, if it instead becomes a debate over acts of terror perpetrated by Muslims, then the White House will be fighting on its preferred ground, and it will have a chance of victory. Never mind that none of the attacks cited in a long list released by the White House would have been prevented by Trump's ban.

Trump and his team have now moved the debate in that direction.

More:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/07/media/media-white-house-undercovered-terror-attacks-list/index.html

[guillaumeb]

1. Recommended.

The GOP excels at framing the debate. It helps also to have a generally compliant corporate controlled media.

[bettyellen]

2. Someone made the point that just pointing to all that coverage will bolster support for

The ban. But I think they e been framing it well and getting better at getting ahead of the lies.