The Shepherds have a Credibility Problem
Scott Jennings on CNN:
"This election is something of an indictment on the political information complex. The story that was portrayed was not true. We were just ignoring the fundamentals."
Scott Jennings does a flawless job taking down an entire panel of woke CNN hosts. pic.twitter.com/w2eBJeTi6E
— Nick Adams (@NickAdamsinUSA) November 6, 2024
Brian Stelter and an anonymous aide:
"Maybe we have a point," a Trump aide remarked overnight. "Maybe 'misinformation' is a lazy word that was never applied to press coverage of Biden's health or the border. Maybe 'offensive' things aren't offensive to most." Maybe, the aide added, some more humility is called for.
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) November 6, 2024
Uri Berliner at The Free Press:
It is one thing to swing and miss on a major story. Unfortunately, it happens. You follow the wrong leads, you get misled by sources you trusted, you’re emotionally invested in a narrative, and bits of circumstantial evidence never add up. It’s bad to blow a big story.
What’s worse is to pretend it never happened, to move on with no mea culpas, no self-reflection. Especially when you expect high standards of transparency from public figures and institutions, but don’t practice those standards yourself. That’s what shatters trust and engenders cynicism about the media.
From New York Magazine’s Intelligencer:
…as one of the TV execs put it, “If half the country has decided that Trump is qualified to be president, that means they’re not reading any of this media, and we’ve lost this audience completely. A Trump victory means mainstream media is dead in its current form. And the question is what does it look like after.”
The MSM has been dead for a while. Also D’s (Biden especially) struggled and failed to use the MSM, for the limited use it has. We had a giant ship take down a bridge in Baltimore. It was a big frickin deal. In the last week or so they got the port up and running. That is the time a prez or candidate should be making speeches and bragging, but they didn’t and the MSM/larger social media space pays attention to bragging and much less about what actually happened.
The “MSM”, in general and w/o actually looking up data, still makes enough money for it’s owners so i’m not betting on change.
D’s need to move far more into the social media space on youtube, podcasts, etc. Cause the old MSM ain’t what it was and doesn’t have the juice.Report
This is the quote that seems to capture it for me:
The NY Times has 10 million subscribers. That seems like a lot but it’s a small fraction of the people who vote.
Many of those people don’t read newspapers any more. Fox News doesn’t have that many viewers. People listen to podcasts and read Facebook, and watch Twitch and YouTube along with other stuff.
The media climate is so, so different than we thought.Report
The NYT has 10 mil with most of them being in the NY tri state area then spreading down the Acela corridor. It’s always been local paper for NY with national add ons. That lots of old MSM/legacy media still have pay walls is part of their problem that limits there reach.Report
The WaPo thing was a good start, I think. No more endorsements. Let your reporters say “I’m voting third party!” or whatever. Hell, let your editors say that. Don’t have the paper give an official one.
It should be enough to know that 19 of the 20 reporters voted for Harris and the twentieth said that they don’t vote because they don’t want it to impact their own impartiality.
And I can draw my own conclusions from that.
That’s not a *FINISHING* point, mind… but it’s a starting point.Report