Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I’ve Been Had—and I’m Mad!
My friends here on Ricochet tried to warn me. They coaxed, cajoled, and reprimanded my decision to rely on the media. And I mostly argued with them. Today The Federalist published an article by Mollie Hemingway, a woman I admire and hold in the greatest esteem when it comes to journalism. And she proceeded to tell me that I’d been had—and my friends were right: a fight between Gov. Ron DeSantis and President Donald Trump is a hoax.
How did I get taken in so easily? For one, I’ve often said that I admire much of the work that Donald Trump accomplished, but I just didn’t like him. I insisted that his demeanor and tweets were unacceptable and were unhelpful. (I still believe that to be true.) But the mainstream media baited me with distortions and lies, knowing that I and others like me look for reasons to discount Donald Trump—and they were successful.
So what have I learned from this episode? For one, I will need to question any writing by the MSM. I hate having to do that. I knew they were out for Trump, hated him, would criticize him, and simply make up lies. But how far could they possibly go?
Apparently as far as they choose to go. And that’s pretty far.
I’m a person who likes to give the benefit of the doubt. I also pride myself on accepting people with whom I disagree into my circle. I suspect, however, that pride has gotten in my way.
I’m embarrassed. I’m disappointed in myself. But I write this post to everyone as a warning. No matter how much you dislike Donald Trump—no matter how much you dislike any politician—you need to factor those emotions into your judgment of anything that is published. We have to take responsibility for our decisions, for the information we share with others, and for the positions we take. That discernment might even serve us well in other areas. As @franco, @drewinwisconsin, @edg, and @flicker stated in my previous post, discernment is a valuable and honorable skill; we can use it to make judgments not only about our government, but about the relationships we build, the positions we take in our communities, and the decisions we make.
For the foreseeable future, I am going to focus on building my discernment muscles when it comes to the media. I will work hard not to let my emotions overrule my own wisdom and common sense. I will listen to my friends when they caution me about my writing. I will try to be a productive citizen. And as much as I dislike having to do it, I will make it a practice to question just about everything from the media, especially those who likely have motives to destroy not only the people we support, but ultimately the country. I hope you will join me in this effort.
We have a country to save.
Published in Journalism
I think I’ve learned my lesson. I caught the last part of Hannity the other night when he was talking to Trump, and he flat out said that he and DeSantis were friends and had been for a long time. I’ll take him at his word.
Well, you’re moving the goalposts here. I said that they don’t always lie.
I’m not going to go back and look up specific references. Off the top of my head: (1) the media correctly announced Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel; (2) the media correctly reported Trump’s peace plan for Israel; (3) the media correctly reported Trump’s decision to ban travel from China early in the Covid pandemic; (4) the media correctly reported Trump’s statement during the first primary campaign hinting that Ted Cruz’s dad was somehow linked to Lee Harvey Oswald.
I think the conversation here started with MSM all reporting on Trump … a lie. I would say that is close. I would say that all MSM reporting on Trump is a construct, sometimes requiring a lie, and otherwise an interpretation serving the reporting entity. Neither the government, the media, or the tech markets are engaged in serving the people when their interests diverge.
Yes, you easily came up with more than I asked for. Thanks. I stand corrected.
For the first three fo those, I bet the tone of the reporting was skeptical and judgmental, rather than cheerleading and excuse-making as for Democrats. I recall coverage of recognizing Jerusalem to be factually correct, with much fear-mongering festooning the facts.
There was a bit of that, if I recall. :)
National Review is jumping on the bandwagon. Frustrates me. I need to be able to tell the difference between NR and NPR.
Thanks! This photo is perfect for my dartboard . . .
Susan, returning to this post, I had another thought.
Do you think that your negative opinion about Trump may have been influenced by prior, unfair or misleading reporting?
If so, that might be a reason to reconsider. I’m not saying that he’s a saint, just that he may not be all that bad, and that he has positive characteristics as well.
Remember that the media doesn’t always simply lie. They can selectively edit, in order to present a person in an unfair light. A specific example of this that comes to mind is the Charlottesville narrative, in which snippets of Trump’s speech were presented out of context to give a false impression, in my view.
This definitely happened to me. During the primaries I avoided Trump like the plague, and took negative reporting of him at face value. My bubble was burst towards the end of that time, when it looked like Cruz really couldn’t catch him, by a customer of mine in Tennessee. He said Trump would beat Hilary, and he and his conservative, rural peers all thought so.
I don’t remember where it came from, but someone said “Just go read ALL of his tweets. Not just the snippets and solos that get the elites worked up.” So I did, and before November 2016. And I discovered that 99% were perfectly reasonable. Trump’s love for America showed in everything he was saying, even when garbled. (Links to transcripts of his speeches were especially enlightening.)
Since then, reinforced by Trump’s actual conservative leadership in office, when I hear of some outrageous conduct on Trump’s part, I just roll my eyes. I sit tight for a few days, and wait for the narrative to implode. Which it has, over and over and over.
Similar story on my end.
Seems like this was an experience many of us shared.
Yup.
Me, too.
With the attendant that there will never be peace in the Middle East because of it.
The controversial US Jerusalem embassy opening, explained:
As the embassy event took place, Israeli soldiers killed dozens of Palestinian protesters along the Gaza border.
With only minimal obligatory reporting.
WAPO: The mirage of Trump’s ‘peace’ deals
By calling it unnecessary and racist.
Coronavirus quarantine, travel ban could backfire, experts fear
With much fanfare because it makes Trump look bad and highlights problems in the Republican Party.
So your answer to @Stad lacks nuance. So while they might have reported what you said on one hand, with the other 100 hands they took it away, leaving the public with the impression that they didn’t happen. A lie in anyone’s book.
All of you who agree with Phil are making me feel so incredibly naive–and stupid. The tweets, too?? The thought of all these misrepresentations and lies is mindboggling. I’m still trying to absorb it. I must say, though, (and maybe I missed it) that I don’t think I’ve read a post that did such a credible job of destroying the MSM with specifics: motivations, data and pointing to an extremely naive country. They counted on the fact that even though they’ve lost a great deal of credibility, they’d convince us. It’s so difficult to believe that I was so drawn in. Wow.
I recall reading how Reagan called Nancy “Mommy” in private conversations. Yup, senile, perverted old git!
Later I read that this was a term of affection from their parenting days, and I recalled my own folks doing similar. That was the moment I saw the whole thing. That moment was one of three or so that just crystallized the lying media sham, and made me see the rampant bias everywhere. It is literally everywhere. Once you start to see it, you will never un-see it.
Guess what? Rush Limbaugh was actually a kind-hearted, intelligent, funny guy. I had to learn that one a couple of times. The Zev Chaffets (sp?) book from maybe ten years ago is a gift.
Bingo
What is funny is, it was never trump that drove me at Ricochet. When I made a 2015 post asking for civility, the Trump supporters agreed and the nevers sneered.
Yes, but the problem is everybody hears about the outrageous behavior. Only conservatives that pay attention hear about the narrative imploding. Most of the Trump hoaxes most the citizens believe are true. So true that to this day Democrat politicians can still use them.
Heh. I can still hear my grandfather’s voice addressing my grandmother as “mother.” But she always called him “Art.”
I have a longtime friend, Ray McGovern, a co-founder of VIPS, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, who was the CIA Officer who did the daily intelligence briefings for President Reagan. He is an expert on Russia and I knew he was a long-standing staunch Democrat from the Bronx. When he told me personally early in Trump’s term that the Russia collusion charge and investigation was a hoax he got my attention. I knew the intelligence that put us in Iraq after 911 was falsified. Then when Chuck Schumer publicly said the intelligence agencies can handle anyone “six ways to Sunday”, I paid very close attention and looked for reliable sources that I trusted for any news about Trump. These Democrats have proved time after time they are not to be trusted. The same for social and public media and big corporate entities, especially big tech and pharma. Verify everything.
Something I think we might share: I was never a “reality TV” fan, and never watched any episodes of The Apprentice. My pre-campaign knowledge of Trump was very thin, and entirely driven by mainstream media. I suspect this is true for many of us who considered Trump’s campaign a joke, and then a threat to the conservative movement.
For me, Trump’s New York accent and braggadocio sync’d with the media portrayal (I lived in NYC two summers–had more than my fill), so it was easy to assume the worst without verifying for myself.
Oops. I hate being wrong.
Me too! The big stuff I knew was a lie early on, like the Russian hoax. I think it’s the accumulation of smaller stuff, like the tweets, that I let slip by. My bad.
Well, it’s not as though Trump makes himself easy to stand by when it’s raining :-) One does get wet. But he’s not throwing us from the sidewalk into oncoming traffic, either. Once you learn how to take him (put cotton in your ears and keep reloading), it’s simple.
During the run-up to 2016, somebody cranked off a great line (some pundit I guess) about howTrump supporters take him seriously but not literally, whereas detractors take him literally but not seriously.
As Midge once said of me (and I paraphrase), Trump “is not debating to debate — he’s talking to tell you things. Once you understand that, you take alot less offense.”
Yeah. It is the wordsmiths who get pedantic.
Me too. Gosh I hate when you’re wrong.
I completely understand. Those who take my word as gospel are inconvenienced when I have to admit fault. (:
We were warned years ago and many didn’t pay attention- York wrote this in his National Review days, before he jumped to the Wash Examiner. ‘