The President vs. the Media

 

If the mainstream media’s relationship to President Barack Obama began as a slobbering love affair, some reporters eventually realized that the relationship had always been one-sided. The press corps may have fallen in love with Obama at first sight, but the president was never really that into them. The most transparent administration in history turned out to be merciless when it came to leaks, substantive interactions were nixed in favor of superficial pressers, and the president was more than happy to bypass the press corps in favor of carefully managed social media when it suited him (as it often did). Don’t take my word for it: This 2015 piece in the Columbia Journalism Review catalogues the pattern admirably.

President Donald Trump’s relationship with the press promises to be, shall we say, different: “Mutual abuse for each other’s benefit” seems about right, though — and this is important — the press keeps getting rolled. Witness the kerfuffle this weekend over the crowd size at the inauguration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jlnhqvp9uJ4

A few observations:

  1. This is among the least substantive issues I can imagine. The size of the crowds at the inaugurations is not and never was important.
  2. I’m not claiming to be any expert on this, but it sure looks like the crowd at Obama’s inauguration was bigger than the one at Trump’s, and it stands to reason that it would have been (first black president taking the oath of office in a majority black city, etc). Regardless, Spicer is transparently trying to have it both ways: i.e, claiming that the lack of any official count means it’s impossible for the press to make responsible claims, while insisting that Trump’s inauguration was “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe.”
  3. The media thinks this is gold. To take the obvious example, the New York Times has at least three pieces dedicated to the subject (here, here, and here), as well as a fourth that compares the inauguration crowd to those at anti-Trump protests.

If the press cares either for its reputation or serving the public, it needs to smarten up, and quickly. Dedicating this many resources to catching the administration in a blatant-but-meaningless falsehood is a waste of time and resources. Focus on the real stuff — the good and the bad — and don’t run down every rabbit hole the administration presents to you. Sean Spicer clearly didn’t put a lot of time or energy on this. Why should you?

As for the administration, I would suggest that it ain’t always going to be this easy. Other people will eventually get wise as to how this works and it’ll make you sloppy when you need to keep your skills sharp.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 93 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):
    You’re correct that Spicer compared the Metro ridership to Obama’s first inaugural [emphasis added]

    Wow, this amazing to me. Even after I explicitly pointed out that Spicer compared Metro ridership to Obama’s last inaugural, the same error is repeated! The reality distortion field is strong.

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):
    but he then immediately said that this was “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe.”

    That’s right, he’s explicitly including people witnessing the event in person and around the globe. And as I pointed out above, “While the press secretary provided no citation for this claim, it is plausible given that streaming and broadcast media reach more people than ever before.”

    This thread is profoundly disturbing to me because it illustrates the degree to which perceptions can be so distorted by prejudice that contact with reality is lost. Everyone makes errors, but a stubborn adherence to errors is as unsettling as the unwillingness to admit them.

    • #61
  2. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    BD1 (View Comment):
    Evan McMullin: “His [Trump’s] attacks are not routine disputes over bias, fairness or facts. They are intended to destroy the media’s ability to hold him accountable.”

    Speaking of inconsequential issues… Evan McMullin?

    The only people I see mention him are people who didn’t vote for him. I mean, by all means if it entertains you, but…

    • #62
  3. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    Wow, this amazing to me. Even after I explicitly pointed out that Spicer compared Metro ridership to Obama’s last inaugural, the same error is repeated! The reality distortion field is strong.

    My apologies; meant “last.”

    • #63
  4. BD1 Member
    BD1
    @

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):

    BD1 (View Comment):
    Evan McMullin: “His [Trump’s] attacks are not routine disputes over bias, fairness or facts. They are intended to destroy the media’s ability to hold him accountable.”

    Speaking of inconsequential issues, why is anyone following what McMullin is saying?

    Evan McMullin voters – “Please don’t bring up the fact that we voted for Evan McMullin.”

    • #64
  5. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):

    BD1 (View Comment):
    Evan McMullin: “His [Trump’s] attacks are not routine disputes over bias, fairness or facts. They are intended to destroy the media’s ability to hold him accountable.”

    Speaking of inconsequential issues… Evan McMullin?

    The only people I see mention him are people who didn’t vote for him. I mean, by all means if it entertains you, but…

    He gets brought up because it appears that Trump voters must be held to account for everything he does, but McMullin voters are not.

    • #65
  6. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    While it may well be true that more people attended Mr. Obama’s first inaugural, that is not relevant to any claim made or implied by the press secretary.

    Of course it is. The press secretary said that there had never been a more watched inauguration ever than Mr. Trump’s.

    One talks about attendance, and the other talks about watching. Is that what this is all about?

    • #66
  7. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    That’s right, he’s explicitly including people witnessing the event in person and around the globe.

    I’ve no reason to doubt the claim that the election was watched by more people than ever: it strikes me as entirely plausible. The literal meaning of Spicer’s statement, however, is that both the crowd and the world-wide audience were larger than ever, not that the two combined were larger.

    Regardless, the whole thing is a waste of time. Everyone here — the media and the Trump administration — should up their game. It’ll be best for all of us.

     

    • #67
  8. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    BD1 (View Comment):

    Evan McMullin voters – “Please don’t bring up the fact that we voted for Evan McMullin.”

    Have fun.

    • #68
  9. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    The Cynthonian (View Comment):
    Sidebar: are we going to get these silly comparison stories with every Trump Administration event? E.g., the State of the Union speech should be soon……I hope there’s not another kerfuffle over that.

    Maybe State of the Union will be a Facebook Note? Or in a perfect world, Twitter. 141 characters: that would be the bomb. (not a white house bomb, just something really really freaking awesome. )

    • #69
  10. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):

    While it may well be true that more people attended Mr. Obama’s first inaugural, that is not relevant to any claim made or implied by the press secretary.

    Of course it is. The press secretary said that there had never been a more watched inauguration ever than Mr. Trump’s.

    One talks about attendance, and the other talks about watching. Is that what this is all about?

    I think it is about the press’ knee jerk attack, to one up Trump. I think Spicer crafted his statement, maybe ambiguously. The press attacked. But really, it is a non-story, and hopefully a Trojan Horse, that gives the administration a window to get things done. Hopefully Good things.

    • #70
  11. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):
    The literal meaning of Spicer’s statement, however, is that both the crowd and the world-wide audience were larger than ever, not that the two combined were larger.

    I see how you might interpret the statement this way but I read it the other way. The “literal meaning” is open to interpretation. The sentence was spoken. I transcribe it as

    This was the largest audience to witness an inauguration period, both in person and around the globe.

    The total audience is in person and around the globe. [In math, and means plus]

    In any case, you’re going out on a limb calling Spicer a liar (“falsehood” in your words).

    • #71
  12. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    drlorentz (View Comment):
    Seriously? So your erroneous reading of the comments is actually correct because the plain English interpretation does not conform your preconceptions. Words have meanings. Attend and watch are words with distinct meanings. A quick check of a dictionary will clarify that for you.

    You’re arguing that Spicer was telling the truth because he said Trump’s inauguration was the most watched inauguration in the history of our country rather than the most attended.  

    As I know you know, this is a slippery way to present a reality one can’t prove that is–per all the evidence that we do have, which includes Nielsen ratings–almost certainly false.

    Even if I were to give Spicer the complete benefit of the doubt, which I kinda did when I first started watching that press conference, my point to you stands.

    The selective application of words to spin a trivial situation that didn’t need to be spun in a direction that ultimately strains credulity undermines the press secretary’s credibility.  And that’s not great.  However you want to define what happened.   ;)

     

     

    • #72
  13. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Tom Meyer, Ed. (View Comment):
    Regardless, the whole thing is a waste of time.

    Yes.  That is absolutely true.  :)

    • #73
  14. Clare Day Member
    Clare Day
    @ClareDay

    Anyone notice that big marching thing that happened?

    • #74
  15. Jules PA Inactive
    Jules PA
    @JulesPA

    Clare Day (View Comment):
    Anyone notice that big marching thing that happened?

    There was a great band from Alabama in the inaugural parade, and many other places. And scads of handsome men in uniform.

    Or are you talking about the clouder of cats?

    • #75
  16. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    In my opinion, this is the first big mistake of the Trump Administration. You could be nearly blind and still plainly see that both of Obama’s inaugurations drew far more people than Trump’s inauguration. But as you stated in so many words, who cares? It is a bit of fluff that means nothing in the grand scheme. It certainly means nothing compared to what we want him to get done, such as replacing Scalia, lowering the insane corporate tax rate for small business, getting started on the southern border, deporting illegals in our prisons, stopping the Merkel-like flow of “refugees” without vetting, etc.

    It does, however, make me fear that Trumps’ ego is going to constantly get in the way of him getting anything done. His buttons are so easily pushed, and this News Media are all experts at pushing buttons. If he doesn’t learn soon to ignore that crap, he’ll end up just doing nothing but responding to their noise.

    • #76
  17. Clare Day Member
    Clare Day
    @ClareDay

    The cat-hats; expected I’d be reading and hearing more about them today and how big their crowd was.

    But yes, the bands and uniforms of the inaugural parade were inspiring, thanks for taking me back to the main event.

     

    • #77
  18. TKC1101 Member
    TKC1101
    @

    Tom , this is all about control of the medium and knowing your target audience.

    The press secretary got angry and mad because the media could not resist running him being angry and mad. The video was carried on every network over and over. Spicer saying the media is lying.

    While the media then talked endlessly about how Spicer was wrong, the target audience, that 64% of working and lower middle class of all races saw the Trump guy calling them out and the media lying again.

    See the Rabble Media #1 where we address the target messaging demographic the administration will go after.

    Trump is going to spend four years talking to that 64% of the electorate and let the rest twist in the wind. All he needs is another 5% of that group. If he delivers a roaring economy and some movement on schools in the inner city, he will get 10%. I believe a few in congress will start to play along.

    The media , in their arrogance, assumed they could run an emotionally hot video of a White House official calling them liars and it would have no impact. You cannot fix stupid.

    • #78
  19. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    You decide.

    NY Slimes info on crowd size, the leftist spin.

    https://nyti.ms/2jO8o7s

    CNN gigapixel of the crowd.

    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

    • #79
  20. YouCantMeanThat Coolidge
    YouCantMeanThat
    @michaeleschmidt

    Tom Meyer, Ed.: some reporters eventually realized that the relationship had always been one-sided

    Who, sir, who was not in the employ of the left wing shills (formerly called “mainstrean” by people who should know better?

    • #80
  21. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Viator (View Comment):
    You decide.

    NY Slimes info on crowd size, the leftist spin.

    https://nyti.ms/2jO8o7s

    CNN gigapixel of the crowd.

    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

    Different angles completely. The PBS time lapse of the entire event confirms the NYT picture. It’s on YouTube.

    • #81
  22. Dr Steve Member
    Dr Steve
    @DrSteve

    Interestingly, the full quote from Sean Spicer was “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe.”

    I hadn’t actually heard this quote, of course, because everyone (including NPR this morning) stopped the tape after “period.”

    Two thoughts:

    First: NPR (and others) were projecting their own metric for “witnessing” the event (attendance), which works for their preferred narrative, while Spicer’s preferred metric (“alternative fact”) was eyeballs “around the globe.” It’s all just a big misunderstanding, which could be resolved through a beer summit of some kind.

    But, second: Spicer is the one who said “period.” This was a clear invitation to stop the tape there. Perhaps if he had said: “semicolon” instead, we would all agree and could move on to more important things.

    • #82
  23. YouCantMeanThat Coolidge
    YouCantMeanThat
    @michaeleschmidt

    Theodoric of Freiberg (View Comment):
    Surely you’re joking, Mr. Meyer. The “press” does not serve the public. It serves its own leftist interests.

    I would say, “Wrong, wrong, wrongity-wrong,” but there is a kernel of truth. We would be far wiser to acknowledge that the press is out to, as the mighty editor thundered in Gaily, Gaily, SELL NOOSPAPERS! During the primaries, Trump sold newspapers and it was lots of fun until he was nominated; since then, including when he (O, horror!) won, bashing him has sold newspapers. But they’re still citing (and, by available evidence, believing) the same polls that said that Mr. Trump could not win as evidence of his unpopularity. That’s the captain of the Titanic thinking the Miami Herald weather report was relevant to his situation. Let ’em!

    • #83
  24. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Dr Steve (View Comment):
    But, second: Spicer is the one who said “period.” This was a clear invitation to stop the tape there. Perhaps if he had said: “semicolon” instead, we would all agree and could move on to more important things.

    You make a valid point about what comes after the “period” but really, how could Spicer possibly know those numbers? Neither you nor I have any idea what was the amount of global eyes on the event, but my gut tells me that the world was probably more interested in “The First Black President” than they were in Donald Trump. Even if my gut is wrong, none of us, including Spicer, have any idea what is the truth. Spicer made a mistake bringing it up in the first place, because until real, verifiable numbers come out, it’s all opinion, just like yours and mine.

    I will say that I hope it is true, because I want the world to take an active interest in my new President so that they can see how much better life can be when the Socialists are not in power.

    • #84
  25. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    Dr Steve (View Comment):
    First: NPR (and others) were projecting their own metric for “witnessing” the event (attendance), which works for their preferred narrative, while Spicer’s preferred metric (“alternative fact”) was eyeballs “around the globe.” It’s all just a big misunderstanding, which could be resolved through a beer summit of some kind.

    Why didn’t I think of that? A beer summit: brilliant. Everyone likes beer, right?

    Dr Steve (View Comment):
    But, second: Spicer is the one who said “period.” This was a clear invitation to stop the tape there. Perhaps if he had said: “semicolon” instead, we would all agree and could move on to more important things.

    Sir, your use of verbalized punctuation is masterful. I tried to explain this concept to Mr. Meyer with less success earlier in this thread. On second thought, maybe “colon” works better since a colon introduces a list of items.

    With a few beer summits and more verbalized punctuation all the world’s problems will vanish and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. [Thanks, Winston.] Or should Churchill have said “broad comma sunlit uplands” to avoid the misinterpretation that all sunlight uplands are broad? Historians will decide.

    • #85
  26. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):
    Different angles completely. The PBS time lapse of the entire event confirms the NYT picture. It’s on YouTube

    There are either people standing solidly all the way to the Washington Monument or not. The gigapixel shot shows them solidly all the way back to the Washington Monument. Maybe CNN used Photoshop to make Trump look good.

    • #86
  27. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Viator (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):
    Different angles completely. The PBS time lapse of the entire event confirms the NYT picture. It’s on YouTube

    There are either people standing solidly all the way to the Washington Monument or not. The gigapixel shot shows them solidly all the way back to the Washington Monument. Maybe CNN used Photoshop to make Trump look good.

    It’s a lower angle and you can’t see the top down view and yet it still shows large gaps. It’s basically an optical illusion.

     

    • #87
  28. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Clever or not, appropriate or not, true or not, the press secretary’s statement will be forgotten in a few months. It’s small potatoes.

    Its main significance is as evidence of the inevitable friction between this administration and traditional media. They are political adversaries, neither one concerned first and foremost with truth.

    • #88
  29. Lois Lane Coolidge
    Lois Lane
    @LoisLane

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    They are political adversaries, neither one concerned first and foremost with truth.

    That’s true.  For sure.  That’s why it’s important for at least one of them to try to retain or build some real credibility.  There are rational and good reasons to be extremely skeptical of both.

    • #89
  30. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    JcTPatriot (View Comment):
    You make a valid point about what comes after the “period” but really, how could Spicer possibly know those numbers? Neither you nor I have any idea what was the amount of global eyes on the event, but my gut tells me that the world was probably more interested in “The First Black President” than they were in Donald Trump. Even if my gut is wrong, none of us, including Spicer, have any idea what is the truth. Spicer made a mistake bringing it up in the first place, because until real, verifiable numbers come out, it’s all opinion, just like yours and mine.

    I will say that I hope it is true, because I want the world to take an active interest in my new President so that they can see how much better life can be when the Socialists are not in power.

    Drudge and slimy Yahoo News tell us that people in Nigeria were following the event:  https://www.yahoo.com/news/nigeria-arrests-65-pro-trump-rally-190819914.html

    It will be interesting if 2017 is the year when the media start holding our presidents to “real, verifiable numbers.”  It could mark the beginning of a new epoch in world history.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.