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.
The Media’s Fetterman Fail
Like most people, even Pennsylvanians, I didn’t watch Tuesday night’s lone debate between the Keystone State’s two major party nominees for US Senate. More important than the debates themselves is what people and the press say about them afterward – the “echo chamber.” That’s what people see and hear, and it drives polling numbers and final momentum.
And what’s being said about Tuesday’s debate is incredible. There’s never been a debate like this, at least in modern political history.
What is clear: John Fetterman, his campaign, and his political party covered up – lied – about the true nature of his mental, if not his physical, condition after a debilitating stroke on May 13, just days before the Democratic primary. Here’s what his campaign said two days after his stroke:
“It’s a good reminder to listen to your body and be aware of the signs. The good news is I’m feeling much better, and the doctors tell me I didn’t suffer any cognitive damage. I’m well on my way to a full recovery.”
It’s good that he encouraged people to listen to their bodies and be watchful of “the signs.” And we all hope he’s well on his way “to a full recovery.” But he said this just weeks later:
“The stroke I suffered on May 13 didn’t come out of nowhere. Like so many others, and so many men in particular, I avoided going to the doctor, even though I knew I didn’t feel well. As a result, I almost died. I want to encourage others to not make the same mistake.”
As for cognitive damage, it has been on full display since NBC reporter Dasha Burns reported on the true nature of his condition, including a “difficult time” understanding small talk. Burns was criticized or experienced pushback by her colleagues at NBC, including “Today Show” host Savannah Guthrie and elsewhere. The candidate’s enablest wife, Gisele Fetterman, demanded her punishment.
As FoxNews reported:
Fox News Digital reported Wednesday on several prominent liberal journalists who, contrary to Burns, insisted that Fetterman was completely coherent during their interviews with him.
After seeing clips of Burns’ interview with Fetterman, Vox’s Kara Swisher tweeted, “Sorry to say but I talked to @JohnFetterman for over an hour without stop or any aides and this is just nonsense. Maybe this reporter is just bad at small talk.”
Liberal YouTube personality Brian Tyler Cohen tweeted, “Here’s my interview with @JohnFetterman from a few days ago. The notion that he wasn’t able to understand is mind-numbingly false.”
And New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister wrote, “As someone who has recently interviewed him: Fetterman’s comprehension is not at all impaired. He understands everything, it’s just that he reads it (which requires extra acuity, I’d argue) and responds in real time. It’s a hearing/auditory processing challenge.”
Back on “Today,” Burns continued: “I will say, it’s important to note that according to the campaign itself, our team was the first to be in the room with Fetterman for an interview rather than via remote video conference and myself, my producer and our crew did find that small talk before that captioning was difficult because of those auditory processing issues I mentioned.”
She added, “Now, stroke experts do say that this does not mean he has any cognitive impairment, doesn’t mean his memory or his cognition is impaired, and he can fully recover from this. And once the closed captioning was on, he was able to fully understand my questions throughout that 25-minute interview.”
Anyone who watched the unedited video or the debate live knows that Burns was not only being truthful but bending backward to be fair, if not favorable.
Here are the comments from disreputable journalists, courtesy of Fox News Digital. Names are emphasized, so you take note of them and their outlets:
“I interviewed @JohnFetterman here, he understood everything I was saying and he was funny,” podcast host Molly Jong-Fast said.
“As someone who has recently interviewed him: Fetterman’s comprehension is not at all impaired. He understands everything, it’s just that he reads it (which requires extra acuity, I’d argue) and responds in real time. It’s a hearing/auditory processing challenge,” New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister defended Fetterman.
“I interviewed him – there were absolutely no issues. I probably stumbled more,” MSNBC host Stephanie Ruhle wrote in a now-deleted tweet.
Trust in the media is at an all-time low. This is yet another reason why. Meanwhile, one journo at the Washington Post blames Donald Trump for this. NBC “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd blames Fox News.
They and their organizations should look into a mirror.
Here are more disreputable journalists piling on Burns’ solid reporting.
“This is ableist af and you should delete this tweet,” Crooks and Liars managing editor Karoli Kuns told the Times reporter.
“This clip makes it abundantly obvious Fetterman has no cognitive issues. He only has mild speech and hearing issues,” Raw Story reporter Matthew Chapman wrote.
“I’m not comfortable with reporters who think people who need closed captions aren’t capable of being senators,” Vulture editor Josef Adalian reacted to O’Keefe. “Deaf people rely on captions to see Mr. O’Keefe’s reports. Does he question whether they can comprehend those words?”
“Ed- I thought or hoped we had passed this kind of prejudice,” Robert Shrum for the USC Center of Political Future shamed the CBS reporter.
“Wow. This is a terrible tweet. Not sure if Ed really believes this or if Oz’s campaign just suggested it, but the ableism is pretty disturbing. Nothing in the interview suggests Fetterman wouldn’t be up to the job,” New York Daily News columnist Brandon Friedman said.
“What’s next? Going after the seeing and hearing impaired? Revolting. You should all be ashamed of yourselves,” TV producer Steven DeKnight shamed Burns.
Robert Shrum is not a journalist but a long-time Democratic political consultant and author who is too happy to pile on with the narrative.
And there’s this tremendous hot take from one of America’s worst media outlets, the turgid Philadelphia Inquirer, which is happy to provide cover for Fetterman at every opportunity.
Fetterman is recovering from a stroke and ensuing language disabilities, and relies on closed captioning as a result. Recently, the disability community and allies have voiced their utter disappointment at the way the public is talking about that.
Take, for instance, a recent NBC interview with Fetterman, in which the host spent a significant amount of time focusing on the need for closed captioning. Politicians, journalists, and others all had something to say. “Will Pennsylvanians be comfortable with someone representing them who had to conduct a TV interview this way?” asked CBS News correspondent Ed O’Keefe. “John Fetterman is simply not capable of doing this job,” proclaimed Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.
The discourse can be summed up in one word: ableist.
It’s a reflection of a larger issue: our country’s persisting discomfort around disabled bodies and minds. In some ways, it’s not surprising, given the fact that we continue to see so few visible examples of people with disabilities integrated into everyday life.
This is your reminder, especially to the imbecilic Inky reporter, that Senator Santorum is the father of a disabled daughter (trisomy 18).
And the gaslighting will continue until. . .
That Slate tweet reminds me of this.
Peter Savodnik of Common Sense News provides two more examples of journalism failures, including the spouse of a sitting Democratic US Senator from Ohio.
Connie Schultz, a USAToday columnist and the wife of Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, observed: “As he continues to recover, @JohnFetterman used technology to help him answer a reporter’s questions. How we as journalists frame this reveals more about us than it does him.”
The Atlantic’s John Hendrickson suggested that the problem wasn’t Fetterman but, well, us. “Part of our culture’s ongoing stigmatization of disability stems from our profound lack of understanding about the variability—and spectrum—of physical and mental challenges.”
Every one of these “reporters” owes Burns and their audiences an apology. They should remove their blue jerseys and rediscover a lost profession.
The spin machine is already whirring away, with journalists claiming that it was the technology that was to blame or that Fetterman was brave to debate Oz or that, as Rebecca Traister put it, Fetterman should be lauded for his “remarkable transparency.” Josh Krashaar, at Axios, was honest and ballsy enough to report that Democrats on Capitol Hill were left rattled by Fetterman’s performance.
Far from shielding Fetterman from scrutiny, in the end too many journalists in the legacy media have simply revealed—once again—why they cannot be trusted. From Russiagate to the lab leak theory to the riots in the summer of 2020 to the effect of school closures during the pandemic, reporters seem increasingly incapable of reporting honestly and comprehensively on the most important issues of the day. Last night, for anyone who was watching the debate with eyes wide open, that much was indisputable. Don’t hold your breath for anything to change anytime soon.
Don’t hold your breath for the media to change.
Our media is primarily responsible for the death of democracy.
Savodnik of Common Sense News provides two more examples of journalism failures, including the spouse of a sitting Democratic US Senator from Ohio.
Connie Schultz, a USAToday columnist and the wife of Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, observed: “As he continues to recover, @JohnFetterman used technology to help him answer a reporter’s questions. How we as journalists frame this reveals more about us than it does him.”
The Atlantic’s John Hendrickson suggested that the problem wasn’t Fetterman but, well, us. “Part of our culture’s ongoing stigmatization of disability stems from our profound lack of understanding about the variability—and spectrum—of physical and mental challenges.”
Every one of these “reporters” owes Burns and their audiences an apology. They should remove their blue jerseys and rediscover a lost profession.
The spin machine is already whirring away, with journalists claiming that it was the technology that was to blame or that Fetterman was brave to debate Oz or that, as Rebecca Traister put it, Fetterman should be lauded for his “remarkable transparency.” Josh Krashaar, at Axios, was honest and ballsy enough to report that Democrats on Capitol Hill were left rattled by Fetterman’s performance.
Far from shielding Fetterman from scrutiny, in the end too many journalists in the legacy media have simply revealed—once again—why they cannot be trusted. From Russiagate to the lab leak theory to the riots in the summer of 2020 to the effect of school closures during the pandemic, reporters seem increasingly incapable of reporting honestly and comprehensively on the most important issues of the day. Last night, for anyone who was watching the debate with eyes wide open, that much was indisputable.
Don’t hold your breath for anything to change anytime soon
Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members.
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community
of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
There are 30 comments.
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Does this count as “ losing” the NYT? Considering the source, I think it’s close.
I watched the debate on You Tube up until the “I I I I I do support fracking…” lie and debacle. It was just too painful to continue. Oz is not a strong candidate, that is for sure, but there was really no point in having this debate. Oz had to do that to make this clear, but he was in a no win position. The media was going to cover for Fetterman. In fact last night it was very hard to find a full version of the debate on You Tube.
Fetterman should not have been allowed to run. It’s another case of outright fraud or malfeasance by the Democratic Party. They deliberately run mentally unfit candidates they think can be elected like our current president. It should be a crime.
Start at 3:20
Their plan is to install his wife, if they can fraud him across the finish line.
18% of people surveyed said that Fetterman won the debate. Maybe they are grading on a weird curve. Maybe they have Munchausen by Proxy. But know that some people will vote for the mummified body of Lenin.
Put me down as None at all for trust in mass media. I expect them to be liars. And they never disappoint.
I don’t think so. If that were the case, they could simply run his wife. She couldn’t be a worse candidate, could she?
As G’Cat noted, it looks all the world like the goal is to install a mentally unfit candidate. And that individual will perform exactly as instructed by the party organization.
And we’ve seen this happen repeatedly. (Waters, Omar, Pressley, Tlaib, Johnson, Biden, Nadler, Pelosi, Lightfoot, Adams, etc.)
Why?
They’re party operatives.
Or sufficiently extreme party adherents.
I can’t find the video now, but this morning Fox News interviewed a group of six Pennsylvania citizens of various political positions for their reaction to the debate. And the woman on the left (added: physically on the left) was, in fact, a democrat party operative. And she was the only one who said she would vote for Fetterman.
So that’s 1 out of 6, or 17%, which is mighty close to the 18% in the survey.
Not so much liars, but rather party propagandists… who lie a lot.
Something tells me that if Fetterman was a Republican, none of the “journalists” bashing Burns would be so insouciant.
Me: Last night after the debate.
Sadly he will win then be replaced with a more suitable canidate. As said most likely his wife or better yet if he had a gay lover / partner.
I sort of understand how the press gets behind him. What I can not understand is how people I know and care about do not see what is up. How they are backing him and would vote for him if they could. The difference in world view is amazing. Not that it matters much. I assume the election will be the normal corrupt put the Democrat in stuff.
I think Tucker Carlson nailed it tonight:
(Clicking here takes you to a rumble version with annoying InfoWars ads interspersed. Content starts at 1:30.)
(Also posting this to the other thread.)
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/20/joe-biden-awkwardly-tells-gisele-fetterman-she-wil/
Gutfeld’s monologue this evening covered the press’s reaction:
But it takes Lawrence O’Donnell to compare Fetterman’s dismal performance with… Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. (I’m not kidding.)
The media is pushing their masters’ narrative. Always have, always will. Pretending to be shocked or pretending that there is a ‘profession’ of journalism that is about telling the truth just gaslights our fellow citizens into continuing to give some weight to what they say. Don’t do that.
Whenever the subject of brain damage comes up, the name “Lawrence O’Donnell” springs to mind.
It has not always been like that. I’m a former newspaper reporter and editor, and that was the exception, not the rule, even 40-50 years ago.
Both Fetterman and Biden’s wives are so power hungry, they’ll put their sick husbands out in public and watch as they humiliate themselves. No class . . .
Yes. I noticed it first starting during the Reagan administration, but certain publications resisted more than others. When Newsweek declared Clinton’s 43% of the 1992 popular vote a “mandate”, their credibility took a big hit. (Note to Newsweek: 43% is a plurality, not a mandate. 57% of the votes cast said “somebody else.”)
I live in Pittsburgh and been to Braddock , PA – it is a mess. Fetterman looks like a truck driver but had led a trust fund baby life. From Fracking, energy, crime, taxes…. he is on the wrong side on every issue. Even before the stroke, you would have to be a fool to vote for him. After the stroke, you would have blind to vote for him. The dems are hoping he can gain the seat and then have Shapiro (the expected gov) to pick the next senator
Somebody get that man some biscuits with mustard!
Edit out the pauses, clip the moderators down, and Fetterman sounds not too bad. Had my son going on the CBS news edit… then I told him Fetterman’s a communist. That’s why a) only live interviews, debates, and the weather when you can’t trust the news, and b) read lots of good blogs – just like dad.
Under that scenario, if i were Gov Shapiro, i’d pull up Conor Lamb, not Gisele. But apparently, Biden already gave their pre-negotiated plan away
Are you sure Biden wasn’t just talking about the “most inclusive voter fraud organization in history” again?
Yup, he is going to win. Sad….
He is effectively running as the generic Democrat they always talk about in polls. Sadly with the normal Democrat cheating he will most likely win.
Well, there were a LOT of exceptions then because I’ve been noticing it since at least 1960. Recall how they covered up JFK’s sexual shenanigans and the mysterious sources of LBJ’s wealth do you think Nixon would have gotten such breaks?
If he does win, it will be more about Oz’ negatives.
That Oz’ negatives couldn’t overcome the cheating?