Fake news is a convenient scapegoat, but the big 2016 problem was the real news

[kentuck]

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/15/13955108/fake-news-2016

<snip>
Clinton’s campaign did have a real news problem, but the problem was with the real news coverage — coverage that dwelled overwhelmingly on a bullshit email server scandal, devoted far fewer resources to investigating Trump’s shady foundation than Clinton’s lifesaving one, largely ignored Trump’s financial conflicts of interest, and almost entirely avoided discussion of the policy stakes in the campaign.

Trump ended the campaign as he began it — unpopular and viewed as unqualified by a majority of voters, with no amount of fake news stories to puff him up succeeding in moving the needle. But Clinton, who began the 2016 cycle with reasonably high favorable numbers, saw them crater under a torrent of email stories with 45 percent of voters telling exit pollsters they were bothered “a lot” by her decision to forgo a state.gov email address, of which 86 percent voted for Trump.

Whether journalists want to be proud or ashamed of the work done by mainstream press during the campaign is up to them, but it was perfectly normal stories in normal outlets that moved the needle in a major way — fake news was a total sideshow.

more at link

[unblock]

1. i'd file the email, benghazi, and clinton foundation stories under fake news as well.

just because the msm covers it and adds a smattering of immaterial facts to the big lie doesn't make it any more of a real story.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

9. And, of course, they have to tell "both sides."

Dems say Rs are trying to cut Social Security.

R spokesman says, "That's a despicable lie!"

More from the Rs at 11.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

2. I agree with the fact that the MSM failed, but with the numbers so close

fake news may have made the difference. The percentage of adults who say that facebook is their main source or news is astounding.

[kentuck]

3. But it was the "real news" that got it close to begin with...

Get it close and it is easier to steal....just ask George W Bush.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

5. Again, I agree. I just think we also need to consider and try to combat

the fact that so many people are eager to believe sensationalized BS and/or have so little grasp on reason and logic as to believe lies such as, "This billionaire, job-outsourcing, lying, cheating, sue-happy, lawyered up fraudster gives a shit about any more than 1% of the people who voted for him."

The other problem is that loads of people, particularly the insular RW, reject any news source that does not tell them what they want to hear--no matter how well researched and sourced--and apparently that problem is only increasing. Any news outlet that disagrees with RW talking points is said to have a "liberal bias," or worse.

[kentuck]

7. Absolutely!

I wonder if anyone else has noticed? That where you might hesitate to post on Facebook anything that might be offensive to someone, that Trump supporters never hesitated to post all kinds of fake and offensive shit?

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

8. This is the problem with Dems. I can't tell you the number of BS chain emails

both political--Obama a Kenyan Muslim!!!!!--and other--Send this to 100 people and get a $100 gift certificate!!!!--my registered Democrat immediate family have received from RW friends and relatives.

When I would write back with links to Snopes or other sources that disproved the BS, or ask them not to send that kind of crap, the sender would get nasty with me! And my parents and siblings would say to me, "Why don't you just delete them? That's what we do. Keep the peace."

Why???!! Sorry, I don't understand why they can send that shit out and we're supposed to tip-toe around their ignorance. I don't understand why people prefer to believe lies than to find out the truth.

[kentuck]

14. They have little regard for other people's feelings.

I have thought about that. I think the best way to counter that is to find a link, to the actual story, and just put the link in the comments section and let them decide what they wish to believe? If they refuse to believe the factual story, there is not much more one could do.

[Ace Rothstein]

13. That doesn't correlate with the election results though.

Trump won Boomers pretty handily, the people getting their news from your usual sources, while Hillary won big with Xers and Millennials, the people getting their news from Facebook.

[underpants]

4. Airtime was the single biggest factor

Both in the primaries and general. Trump was on like "The Truman Show". We heard about Hillary not from her (except 4 specific instances).

[unblock]

10. exactly. interesting that she had big leads in the polls after the conventions and debates.

the only times people really heard from her that wasn't all about emails.

turns out, people really like her when they get to actually see and listen to her.

[McKim]

25. The. TV Media Made a God out of Trump

The TV Media made a god out of Trump. The news was all about HIM, and little about Hillary or Policy Positions. TV is the main vehicle for older folks, aging boomers and those who don't get their news form the net. This is sickening. Until we restore the Fairness Doctrine, this is how it's gonna be!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. there were many things that went wrong. one is 8 year incumbency of one party

makes it hard for someone from that party to win. that's just a regular trend factor.

then are all the external factors: Comey, Russians and Wikileaks, Bernie or Bust movement, a person who really stirs up hate and ends up energizes a lot of racists, a media that treated her as though she was already PEOTUS and him as though he was an entertainer, Voter suppression of key demographic groups. then the fake news stories about her.

Then are internal factors: hillary should not have given the goldman sachs speeches. i'm less sure about private server as other secretaries of states have used private emails, so i think that one was cooked up, but the GS speeches were her doing. the data being wrong in the states that mattered the most which then made her campaign make some decisions that were not great in retrospect.

[pansypoo53219]

11. the gnewz trying to make their failure to expose RUMP + FELLATING him instead

is why the teevee gnewz are not NEWS.

[Ohioblue22]

12. Nonsense it all boils down to not enough dems voting

For dem nom. There'S enough dems to win but you have fall in line in the general and stop wasting your votes.

[JCanete]

16. The media affects voter turn-out. The media affects American opinion on voter suppression and

election fraud, and makes the logical fallacy of false equivalency into an art form, both confusing voters and depressing their enthusiasm. The media continues to ignore stories of the outright dumbing down of education in states like Texas, in favor, presumably, of not looking partisan. The media ignores every story under the sun about things Trump has said, or done in his past, and when they do cover it, they either don't take it to task or again, they falsely equivocate.

Nothing has the impact that the media does on how we vote and in what numbers. Focusing on any other cause of Democratic defeats over the years is taking your eye off the ball.

[Ohioblue22]

17. Well it's easy ignore the conservative media and vote for the

Dem nom it's really that easy everyone here has their own idea on why the dems lost. But the dems lost because not enough dems voted for the dems nom. Doesn't matter from where the influence came , ignore it.

I saw the media too and I thought I don't care what they say I'm voting for whomever the dems nom. If we all did that we wouldn't be coming up with all these theories on why dems lost. I think it's called over analyzing

[JCanete]

19. still focusing on symptoms. If that's where you want to spend your energy, fine, but people aren't

just born educated and enlightened. Most of us, and I gotto say that includes a lot of people on this board, you and I will agree(though we may disagree about whether or not I belong in that group) don't rise to the level of enlightened. Much of our reasoning is almost entirely driven at the limbic level of our brains. Our consciousness just window dresses that by cherry picking the evidence to match our emotions.

Saying "If every dem just did this it would be all great," is just as non-prescriptive as saying "If everybody just acted in good faith, for the common good the world would be a better place." Yeah, it would.

the thing that actually influences elections beyond anything else is the media. Before you move back to symptoms please address that in one way or another. Agree, or disagree.

If you disagree, what do you believe has the greatest impact?

If you agree, why don't we take that on already rather than getting mired in trying to bandage the rash instead of curing the disease?

[Ohioblue22]

22. It seems that you see lack of voting as a symptom

Of a problem . I see lack of voting as the problem. if you care about getting dems in office you need to vote. You can vote democratic and get dems into office so that WE control the levers of government or you can focus on your issues and be where we are now.

This isn't a 'if everyone was nice to each other .....' situation. voting will take place and one person will win and the other won't. You get to chose whether to run things or be run over. All it takes is voting.

[JCanete]

23. but registered democrats come in a range of packages...a wide fucking range of packages. The media

is quite effective at manipulating a lot of them into not voting, and for stupid reasons at that, or into even voting for a horrible candidate from the other party.

I wish it weren't so, but saying "if every democrat went the poles and voted, we would have won," isn't really saying anything. It isn't a prescription. It isn't an approach. Its being angry at them for not doing so. Its not looking at why they didn't do so.

But I digress. For whatever reasons, this plea isn't gaining much resonance with anybody really, so maybe I'm the crazy one tilting at windmills.

[Ohioblue22]

24. Well the dems have been using this model of the voting

Lately and look where we are maybe it's time to try a new way of getting dems elected.
If the dems don't vote for dem candidates what do think those candidates will do? Move to the right to get cons to vote for them. Pissing off more dems so now they don't vote so the dems candidates have to go father to the right to get votes and so on.
It comes down to voting

[JCanete]

15. YES! The only thing is that we keep thinking the media is shitty just because. Or maybe because

it always has to chase ratings.

neither are true. The media is not a news coverage institution, it is a news generation institution. It decides what it wants to make into news. It is very effective at making into news whatever it wants to. Granted, stories have to get traction, but a lot of shit gets thrown onto a wall, and the story that both sticks AND matches an outlet's sensibilities(put nicely), or agenda(put cynically), is the one that gets beaten over our heads until our dizzy asses are repeating it to people who never watch or listen to news, as fact. Ultimately truthiness prevails.

It is really important that when we hone in on the media, which we absolutely should be doing, we don't miss the underlying mechanisms. Their coverage simply cannot be disassociated from the interests of the parent companies that own them. Whether that influence comes in the flavor of marching orders(ala fox, but to some extent other news outlets---3 republicans for every dem on a panel was an old CNN thing, not to mention hiring CIA operatives), or is catering to the tastes of owners and producers, which might influence whether or not reporting on big advertisers or anything under the parent company's umbrella is tacitly or explicitly off-limits. I imagine that goes for other media giants too since nobody wants an arms race. Media ownership also ensures that pundits and reporters that get hired are "on the right page" when it comes to what kind of reporting is important, or understanding "what the people want to hear." That doesn't mean they don't put up any opposing voices to the thrust of an institution's overall lean. Just that the lean is still dominant and that those minority voices only help to lend an illusion of non-partisanship to it.

We can't have a fourth estate that is actually owned by the interests that it needs to be free to report on, not to mention hamstrings its ability to report on anything else objectively. But that is what we have. Every other thing that we point at when it comes to our loss in this election and all previous ones, is pointing in the wrong direction. I wish we could put it to rest, just in this microcosm that is DU, but maybe people just don't want to be that damn cynical or feel that helpless, and refuse to truly examine this key factor in American politics, favoring scapegoating Clinton for being a weak candidate, or Sanders for Bob's or Comey(he's a dick and in my book a criminal, don't get me wrong), or Russia(also Putin is a dick and a Demagogue), or fake news or "stupid racists."

[uponit7771]

18. They spent 3 time the number of hours on email than all other issues... fuck the M$M

[JCanete]

20. Its nice to be on the same page once in a while. Don't you think its time though, that we say

what you just said, as a united Party? Loudly and often? From every single Dem strategist to elected office holder?

[uponit7771]

21. +1

[BayouBengal07]

26. I think they didn't know they were playing with fire.

The polls all had Clinton winning easily, so the press assumed they could afford to go "full emails" to make the race interesting, but they underestimated their influence. Now they've elected Trump.

[Garrett78]

27. While fake news may not have been responsible for the result...

...it's important to recognize that tens of millions of people don't consciously recognize it as fake. They exist within an alternate reality. They're comfortable there and will not leave. And then you've got the people who are simply out for themselves and vote accordingly. Democrats must find a way to outnumber those groups, because virtually all of them are unreachable.

A Craig Silverman interview on NPR that's worth listening to: http://www.npr.org/2016/12/14/505547295/fake-news-expert-on-how-false-stories-spread-and-why-people-believe-them

[AgadorSparticus]

28. I have been saying this repeatedly that it is a news problem.

The media is A BIG PROBLEM. They are choosing ore elections and we point or fingers at everything but the media's involvement.

Just look at DU and the myriad of reasons why she lost. She has lost because of her emails. She lost because she didn't fill stadiums. She didn't connect to rural folks. She doesn't connect to nonprofessionals. She didn't smile enough. She smiled too much. It was because of Bernie. It wasn't because of Bernie. It was because she was too confident. It was because she is an insider. It was because she doesn't excite people. It was because she wasn't democratic enough.....

The excuses never ends. But people seldom really put the blame on the billshit propaganda media machine for what it is.

It is because of our media that I place the blame on Trump being where he is. I blame the media entirely. They pushed him through the Republican primaries. No one had a chance. And we should have seen that coming and addressed the blood that is on the media's hands.

[Madam45for2923]

29. In America the Media is a problem!

[AgadorSparticus]

30. Years ago, I traveled oversees and was shocked to see the difference in news content

CNN abroad is a different beast than the CNN here in the U.S. It took me a couple years more to accept the fact that our media is a sham before I cut the cable cord.

There's PLENTY of news options online.