Commander-In-Tweets at it again

Making America great.  One tweet at a time.

I have no problem with the President tweeting and I'm glad he is.  I don't trust the media to represent what the President says and to be fair to the President so I believe with the overt bias that is there in the media the President is right to go direct to the people and Twitter is a way he can do that.

Right now it's hard to trust most politicians but way more undeserving trust is the media which is so biased and prejudiced that they have lost all credibility and frankly I don't know if they can ever be trusted or gain trust back.  I get amused when people point to FOX and claim that FOX is biased Conservative because while there might be some truth to that as far as their programming because they have Hannity who is not a journalist or reporter but is a commentator and highly Conservative, Fox News is the most unbiased of the lot of them.   FOX appears to be left leaning mostly because most all of the other media outlets, the other stations, are so far leaning left that FOX appears to be biased Right by being close to the center.

I think Trump feels he has to use Twitter in order to talk direct to the American Public and his supporters  so I don't have a problem with it.  The place that Twitter and Trump can be a problem is that it is Trump unbiased and while he hasn't been a politician that long there is something to be said for diplomacy and with the raw posting of his tweets there is the potential that he would make a mistake and say something that could easily become a problem with some of our adversaries or other National leaders.  Time will tell how that turns out.

A few things...

1.) I have no problem with public figures using Twitter.  In fact, I am glad they do.  It allows me to see current news with no delay.   However, to be the President and to constantly be on twitter is very troubling.

2.) Also, in regards to using Twitter as a means to communicate a message... sure that is fine but make sure your facts are right.  Trump notoriously gets a news snippet or overhears a conversation and bursts onto Twitter like a lightning rod immediately sending false accusations and incorrect news stories to likely, millions of people.   Again, this is dangerous.  

So I think you and I agree on that fact that Twitter, used cautiously and with proper information is not a bad thing.  However, I think we differ on the frequency of use and probably the nature of his careless tweets.

I would respectfully disagree with you about Fox News as far as reporting goes for they usually try and present all sides with their news reporting.  As for shows such as Hannity and Tucker Carlson and some of the others I wouldn't  argue the point for they do have conservative leaning host.  AS for "The Factor" I do believe Bill to be conservatively leaning but I do also believe he tries to present all sides and keep it fairly neutral.  

I have also seen other networks try and duplicate bringing in other viewpoints but for the most parts their anchors show and demonstrate profound bias and you can see it in their editing and choice of programming.  Also in the reporting when the reporters jump to conclusions or make statements that reveal their bias.  This happens far more on other networks than it does on Fox but I also have to say that some of the reporters at times do show their preference but far less than the other networks, in my own opinion.

Back to Twitter.  We do agree in part but I don't know how radical the President has been with the facts.  I think he's been quite smart in what he has done for he has seized control of the narrative especially  with regard to the media's obsession with the Russians.  Don't get me wrong though, the President isn't justified by source less statements, based in no given evidence, just because the media does the same but then the media also should not be throwing out stories that are baseless and have no grounds, evidence or given sources just with hopes to create something that apparently isn't there.  You surely can see that they do that also.  Right now there is an extremely adversarial relationship between Trump and most all the media outlets but given their coverage of Trump can you really blame him?  With 88% negative coverage in Trumps 1st month you really can't blame him for not declaring them as friends and taking the stand he does.  I find it fairly amusing just knowing that heads are blowing up at many of the news organizations when Trump makes some of the statements he has about CNN and denying them access like he did. 

CNN (Counterfeit News Network) in the way they have been reporting about Trump and stories regarding Trump has earned, in my opinion, that Counterfeit moniker.   While MSNBC and NBC and the others are also demonstrating themselves to be biased they have not gone off the reservation such as CNN and the New York Times has, at least it doesn't seem they have.

MonkeysUncleByMarriage posted:

But let's be clear about one more thing.. Fox News is definitely bias.. as are all other news organizations.   Their bias, as with CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, WSJ, are in their editorials.   There is a big difference between news stories and editorials.   

I read fox news often and will even watch it occasionally, but when it comes to people editorializing... I turn it off and I don't read the articles.   The right seems to have an issue where they think a negative news story is an example of bias.   It's not.  It's news.   If CNN posts an article that Trump supporters deem negative, but the article is simply a news story with facts, that doesn't make it bias.  That means it just doesn't fit your party's or candidates narrative.   

 

I'm sure you wish that was the case mubm,

That is the case.  It's just sad that we live in a country where if something doesn't fit your narrative you deem it fact.  If it does, regardless of how outlandish and little evidence, it is true.   

I remember some time ago, a friend of mine (I use that term loosely) posted a salacious nonsensical article about Obama doing something nefarious to the troops.   This was easily debunked.  I posted numerous articles from numerous sources included debunking websites.  She then admitted that "yeah it's probably not true" but then proceeded to say "but I'm gonna leave it up on social media because it supports the troops."  

Really?  So you admit that an article is fake, but you will leave it up nonetheless because you support the troops so ardently?  How does that even make sense?  She left it up because she was trying to smear Obama any way she could.  It's completely nonsensical.  

That'd be like me posting an article "Trump uses machine gun to mow down gay rights advocates" and knowing it is completely false but keeping it up because I support gay rights.  Give me a bleeping break.