RSS

Tag Archives: coverage

Cover Up of Alt-right Cop Killer by MSM

Black man in Dallas shoots and kills cops… It’s news 24 x 7.

Black Man in Louisiana shoots and kills cop…It’s NEWS 24×7, including lots of attempts to blame BLM.

Whait alt-right racist shoots 4 Cops, killing one…And hardly a mumble.

Welcome to Jim Crow American News.

 

Advertisements
 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

The MSM will Likely Hide Inauguration Demonstrations

So…What happens if a couple of million folks show up to protest the Chumph coronation?

You sure won’t see it on the MSM!

Believing somehow they are doing the right thing by trying to keep the protesters confined to obscure sectors of the city, the Federal and City officials are hiding the big lie.

If the protesters want to be seen and heard, they are going to have to ignore the rules just like the scumbag Republicans – and march right down Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues.

If they actually do get a million or more protesters…There isn’t a damn thing authorities can do to stop it. Pick a few fights with the Trumpazoid neo-Nazi types – and it will be all over the press.

Suggest if you plan to attend…Come girded for battle.

Image result for beer riot

Sho’ ‘Nuf Get Your Attention,,,

Ignoring anti-Trumpers: Why we can expect media blackout of protests against Trump’s inauguration

On Jan. 20 — 16 years ago — thousands of protesters lined the inauguration parade route of the incoming Republican president. “Not my president,” they chanted. But despite the enormity of the rally, it was largely ignored. Instead, pundits marveled over how George W. Bush “filled out the suit” and confirmed authority.

“The inauguration of George W. Bush was certainly a spectacle on Inauguration Day,” marvels Robin Andersen, the director of Peace and Justice studies at Fordham University, in the 2001 short documentary “Not My President: Voices From the Counter Coup.”

It’s nearly impossible not to anticipate the eerie parallels between George W. Bush’s inauguration and that of Donald Trump.

“Forty percent of the public still believed that Bush had not been legitimately elected, yet there’s almost no discussion of these electoral problems or the constitutional crisis,” Andersen explains in the film. “Instead, Bush undergoes a kind of transformation where he fills out the suit and becomes a leader. Forgotten are any of the questions about his ability, his experience or his mangling of the English language. His transformation is almost magical,” she adds.

Andersen estimated the inauguration protests, which occurred throughout the country, garnered approximately 10 minutes of total coverage on all the major networks.

“When we did see images of protesters, there was no explanation as to why. We were asked to be passive spectators in this ritual of legitimation when the real democratic issues that should have been being discussed were ignored,” Andersen says in the film, reflecting on the “real democracy” in the streets of Washington, D.C.

Protesters marched in opposition of the Supreme Court’s Gore v. Bush verdict following the 36-day Florida recount that gave the presidency to George W. Bush. Others railed against voter suppression and the Florida purge that affected thousands of voters.

“It was a diverse crowd with lots of things to say, but they weren’t given a chance to speak, they weren’t given a voice,” Andersen says.

Now, two weeks before Donald Trump’s inauguration, Andersen foreshadows what America can expect come Jan. 20.

“There will certainly be similarities, but Trump doesn’t have the legal delays that the Bush administration had, so the idea that the inauguration is a coronation isn’t going to be part of the protest discourse,” she told AlterNet.

“All Trump will have to do is keep somewhat quiet and do the bare minimum to look like a human being and they will anoint his appearance,” she noted.

Fake news, Russian hacking and Trump’s outlandish campaign promises will all be a distant memory for the networks, Andersen predicted.

On the other hand, “the protests might present an alternative frame, because Trump has asked his supporters to come to Washington. Bikers for Trump will be there. There will of course be tens of thousands more progressive protesters, but the mainstream media will ‘balance’ that out and make them seem equal,” she predicted. “And they will of course emphasize any tiny bit of conflict that occurs.”

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 7, 2017 in Second American Revolution

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

MSM Coverage of Obama Biased Negatively

News coverage of President Obama is biased towards the negative, explaining why he is having such a difficult time getting his message across, or getting credit for the accomplishments of his Administration. This isn’t the first time this has happened. If you will remember back to the 2000 Presidential Election cycle, the MSM all but crowned Bush President 11 months BEFORE the actual election. The MSM spent a lot of time tossing Bush softball questions and giving him the benefit of the doubt.

They are doing it again, this time in support of a stable of Republican mental midgets and moral degenerates who, under no circumstance could be considered “Presidential material”. It is time to fight back, at least for fair media coverage.

 

Study finds harsh media coverage for Obama

President Obama “has suffered the most unrelentingly negative treatment” of all presidential candidates over the past five months, according to a study released Monday from the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.

Pew found that Mr. Obama was the subject of negative assessments nearly four times as often as he was the subject of positive assessments. It found he received “positive” coverage nine percent of the time, “neutral” coverage 57 percent of the time and “negative” coverage 34 percent of the time.

The study, which was conducted using a combination of “traditional media research methods [and] computer algorithms to track the level and tone of coverage,” cuts against the widespread conservative claim that the “liberal media” aides Mr. Obama and other Democrats while attacking Republicans.

Pew says it looked at coverage from more than 11,500 news outlets, including local and national broadcasts, news websites and blogs.

Mr. Obama’s negative coverage could be explained in part by the fact that he is “covered largely as president rather than a candidate,” Pew said – and coverage of him is linked to the struggling economy.

Among the Republican presidential candidates, Pew found that Rick Perry has received the most positive coverage of all the candidates, with 32 percent positive coverage. He was followed by Sarah Palin (31 percent), Michele Bachmann (31 percent), Herman Cain (28 percent) and Mitt Romney (26 percent.) Palin, a vocal critic of the media, ultimately decided not to seek the GOP nomination.

Perry had the best ratio of any candidate, with 32 percent positive coverage to 20 percent negative coverage, a 12 percent net positive ratings in terms of coverage. He was followed by Palin (with 9 percent net positive coverage), Bachmann (8 percent net positive), Cain (5 percent net positive), Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman (both with 4 percent net positive coverage.) Pew found that Cain surged in positive coverage starting in late August – even before he did so in the polls.

The only candidate who received more negative coverage than Mr. Obama was Newt Gingrich, whom Pew found was the subject of negative coverage 35 percent of the time. That can be attrubited in part to his early stumbles, including his criticism of the House GOP Medicare plan and the decision by top staffers to abandom Gingrich’s campaign. While Pew found that Mr. Obama received just nine percent positive coverage, however, Gingrich received 15 percent positive coverage.

The candidates with the worst coverage ratio were Mr. Obama (25 percent net negative coverage), Gingrich (20 percent net negative), Rick Santorum (3 percent net negative) and Mitt Romney (1 percent net negative.)

As Politico’s Keach Hagey notes, Pew found that Mr. Obama had widely positive media coverage during his first 100 days in office, with 42 percent positive coverage and 20 percent negative coverage.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on October 17, 2011 in Great American Rip-Off, News

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Wireless Wars – Subscribers Fight Back

Everyone by now has seen the Verizon Ads about their chief rival, AT&T, and their lack of coverage. My personal favorite is Santa checking the Reindeer –

Needless to say, Verizons commercials have generated a great deal of angst at AT&T.

AT&T has had a chokehold on what is arguably the best cell phone in the market, the IPhone, since it’s introduction. They have been able to charge premium prices for the phone, as well as add ons for the service.  The service quality has been less than stellar, despite the premium prices. Subscribers are hopping mad – and at least some, are striking back…

Frustrated Subscribers Target AT&T

Thanks to the runaway success of the iPhone, AT&T has the largest wireless network in the country—and the lousiest. Fed-up subscribers, who pay the telco about $30 a month just for data (and another $40 or so for voice), are planning an assault this Friday called Operation Chokehold.

The idea is to cripple AT&T’s network in order to draw attention to its weakness. To do so, participating iPhone users will run data-heavy applications over AT&T’s 3G network on Friday from noon to 1 p.m. Pacific time.

The plan was apparently launched by the Secret Diary of Steve Jobs, a popular blog that satirically impersonates the Apple CEO, but Operation Chokehold has since gained steam with notices popping up on other tech blogs.

It shouldn’t take much to buckle AT&T’s network—it has trouble functioning under normal conditions. Whether the company will do anything in response is another matter. Verizon has blanketed the country in ads mocking its chief rival’s network—ads that wouldn’t be so effective if they didn’t ring true. AT&T tried to sue, but gave up in the end.

The company promised to improve its network in New York and San Francisco—two known problem areas—but don’t hold out hope. AT&T appears as if it is looking for ways to discourage users from using its product—the network—or at least charging them more, according to wireless chief Ralph de la Vega.

Is this the beginning of a new level of consumer rage, kicking back against the dubious business practices of American Corprations which over the last 20 years have become more similar to organized crime than capitalist enitities competing with better products and prices?

Wireless companies have also benefited hugely from a Bushit era Federal Communications Commission run by Michael Powell which couldn’t see a merger or acquisition that could possibly lead to a a monopoly – shrinking the number of competitors and eliminating smaller more technically inventive companies along the way (as well as a few million high-tech jobs). They have also benefited from the evisceration of the Federal Trade Commission, virtually eliminating any semblance of consumer rights, allowing draconian cancellation fees, abusive contract terms, and deceptive practices – leading to “$20,000 phone bills“.

Consumer push back?

What took so long?

Frustrated Subscribers Target AT&T

 
16 Comments

Posted by on December 15, 2009 in General

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: