Hits: 268
Here lies
Kamala Harris
Ran for President 2024
Defeated by Big Media November 5, 2024
WPCNR NEWS & COMMENT By John F. Bailey November 4, 2024;
It has been going on for eight years: Editorial Burial
What is Editorial Burial?
It is burying the truth by irresponsible coverage of what is alleged but not proven, or what is said that is not constructive.
It is subtle denigrating of a person by dwelling on parents, upbringing, influence of race or gender with prejudiced judgment of what is “acceptable” childhood, a good “race” with good behavior and its influences.
It is writing about why people feel a certain way justifying their behavior despite it being misinformed and destructive, more a false truth than the reality, that in a subtle way excuses the feelings. Makes it O.K.
It is writing about feelings people have toward a choice of leader regardless of the consequences of electing persons who are inept.
It is the more than willing compulsion of edtors and owners of media to tell both sides of a story, but placing one side of the story on the front page or in lead-off of a broadcast report and burying the other side of the story on page 14.
It is the self-righteous editor hutzpah that compels editors that they must tell both sides of the story no matter how dangerous and untrue what one or both sides may be saying. It is the safe way to play the news. “Fair and balanced.”
The hubris of driven editors who insist on diluting a very nasty event like the Madison Square Garden rally and a profile of how a vice president running for the same office, but conveniently pairing that story with a national story on the economy on the right side of the page.
Front page 1 : Trump “Don’t Say It Style–Transgressor” just below negative analysis of Harris economy aproach
ON PAGE 14–HARRIS DECLARES TRUMP IS DISQUALIFIED
The shame was that the paper I saw did not give equal play and front page coverage of the Harris rally where Ms. Harris said Mr. Trump should be disqualified from the presidency because of his remarks about Elizabeth Cheney should be placed in front of a gun without giving full blown coverage to the Harris rally the same weekend on the front page.
Never mind the the fact that one side says the same offensive, vacant promises every day, and every day we see the same analysis of a candidate’s speech essentially repeating a candidate’s message.
This in my judgment is irresponsible destructive journalism, preserving the news organization as one of the power establishment and preserving after-campaign status as an acceptable and prestigious paper of record to curry favor, saying “look how fair we are.”
Reporting both sides of a story when one side is uttering campaign slogans and the other side is trying to say what and how they have to lead the country is giving the campaigns equal weight validity. Burying a major historical statement on page 14 and the other campaign rally on page 1 is not equal. To my knowledge, no other presidential candidate has ever said their opponent should be disqualified. You might fact-check there — but really that is front page upper right put the stories side by side. It is a no brainer.
On Saturday there was a blatant demonstration of this burying a message that had to be reported equally with the coverage of another was committed by a newspaper of record.
Front Page:
Page 14 Harris meeting coverage adjacent to continuation of front page Trump article and a J.D. Vance piece:
Not only that but often when the candidate tries to explain you cannot say what you are going to do when what you will do is decided when the situations are in the future when you, if elected have to deal with it. This perfectly rational response is his is often met with a flurry of pompous reporter questions saying well what will you do “if.” This line of questioning is done just to make the new media look good.
When they deal with an evasive candidate, who is aggressive and threatens them, the reporters never challenge that. Never asking a media-hating candidate “Well would you prosecute me if I reported a secret deal you made with Vladimir Putin?” Well this mythical evasive candidate could very well answer,
“Well, if had made a secret deal and your betraying it, hurt my policy I would.”
But often the evasive slogan spouting candidate, would duck by saying, “I would never do that”
But that opens another line of questions pursuing whether or not the slogan slinger candidate, “ Hold on, Mr Candidate, doesn’t prosecuting a reporter for a story if true take away freedom of speech. What would be freedom of speech and what not under your administration? ”
The effect of this practice putting the pouting hectoring face of the same candidate on the front page every day of the week has the effect of a political ad pounding home the message of the flamboyant candidate’s clever subtle building his strength week by week by upgrading promises without premise repeatedly written about on the front page or in the lead or on the proliferation of right wing cub reporter websites every day.
The constant exporsure every day every newscast of high profile hyperbolic events has an effect that gaslights this impression to the public:
The louder candidate, the threatening candidate, the candidate who speaks to what or who people of righteous belief feel, fuels fear in voters and makes them more confident in him or her. The strong man who will fix it. In fact two days the Republican coined a new slogan “Trump will Fix it”
That’s what we all want isn’t it? The plumber. The electrician. The doctor. The mechanic. To make the problem go away.
At the end of the last week there was another twist on Make America Great, which turned into (seen on the podium of the candidate) “Keep America Great” that the latest clinch line, “Trump will Fix It.”
This is how wizards of advertising make you believe in a product. “It may taste great but it may be less filling” This how light beer was invented and sold.
Circling back as the scam artists and fundraisers say, covering every unexamined or explained promise of a candidate because they say it outrageously, proudly, confidently is not responsible. It pounds home a false positive. Remember President, “I am not a crook” Nixon who said “I havea plan to end the war in Viet Nam?” Well he did: 5 years later we withdrew. Bottom line: there was no plan. Thousands more died.
Nixon pounded that lie about the plan and he defeated Humphrey in 1968.
Circling back to this morning, one of the paper’s of record covered the last candidate rally and ticked off all the lies on the front page. Thousands of dollars of advertising free by covering that Trump rally. Once again the editors choosing to write a long debunking of what was said highlighted the message.
This is another stroke of creative genius on whose who have devoted themselves to building an image of competence.
Voters’ possible hates of others, misunderstandings of business culpability for inflation, builds the troubled voter feeling that the louder stronger candidate they see every day on propaganda networks, establishment papers of record, and hear from irresponsible media personalities getting paid to say what the network may be telling them want o say, has the strength to help them more feel the message with no substance, but substantial strength brings back the old western hero we yearn for the actor, the young hero, the youth Mr Smith Goes to Washington who looks like Jimmy Stewart.
The media and we love the movies. They make movie comparisons to candidates,
The trouble is movies are not reality
What a candidate says matters.
When the voters do not hear equal coverage, the rational message is buried because it is not sensational enough for the front page.
The failure of a campaign or candidate to answer questions does not matter. It is his or her persona that counts. The more the same message booms out there the stronger the bigger the lie gets. Nixon showed us that.
If Ms. Harris loses this election.
Blame the media.
They have covered Mr. Trump as a model successful businessman.
Now in their coverage of this campaign they have made him President by amplifying his messages, vilifying Ms. Harris and Mr. Biden, by reporting the conflicting sides with a double standard.
The journalism schools have got to change their tune.
Both sides now is not the way, equal space and time is.
Dumb nasty hate messages are not news.
They are calls to chaos.
They incite violence against one another.
Editors should know that.
It is time to realize that “If it bleeds, it leads”.
“It leads to violence.”
