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.
It’s Trump’s Fault!
It’s bad enough that we have to question just about everything the media tells us. They refuse to report the facts on the cities being 
trashed by rioters, characterize federal law enforcement in cities as the actions of a dictator, and one of the latest insults came from Nancy Pelosi calling COVID-19 the “Trump Virus.” I guess I should have seen that one coming; we’ll probably hear the media saying it’s only right to name it after Trump, since he appears to be regularly calling the virus the “Chinese Virus.” You know, tit-for-tat.
Lately I’ve been especially concerned about the distortions that the media is promoting regarding COVID-19. I’m perplexed at their willingness to mischaracterize just about everything about the virus: how children respond to it, which children are spreaders, whether schools should be re-opened, which drugs are effective and how they are best used, death and hospitalization rates versus cases. They try to create the most alarming narrative that they can, and people are terrified. It’s one detestable thing to lie about things that Trump has said and done, but why would they be terrorizing the American public, when people are literally concerned about who will live or die?
Wait. Aside from the click-bait opportunity for TV and newspapers, are these distortions also all about Trump? Do the media think that they can say anything at all, even if their readership is paralyzed by their agendas, in order to somehow damage Trump before the elections? I think the answer is yes, but I couldn’t figure out how the media’s lying about the development and progression of the COVID-19 would damage Trump.
Then I realized the answer didn’t have to make sense. Anything, anything, that can tangentially be connected to Trump is fair game. It was tough for me to make the connection, but this is what I think the media are doing.
Follow me here: The virus is all Trump’s fault; forget about the role of the Chinese. Questions about treating the virus: Trump’s fault. Delays in getting a vaccine: Trump’s fault. Confusion about whether to wear masks: Trump’s fault. Trump’s insistence about opening up to save the economy—well, there it is! The virus is spreading—never mind that the virus is doing exactly what viruses do, and probably would have done the same regardless of when businesses re-opened—do I need to repeat myself? It’s Trump’s fault.
So, promoting the worst possible message about the virus may horrify people enough to hide in their homes, true or not, and supports the media’s greater goal to destroy Trump before the election. Please disregard that those actions are a betrayal of the public trust.
After all, it’s Trump’s fault.
Published in Politics
Our media are broken. We need new ones.
I think you’ve nailed it, but I think it is an “and,” not an “or.” :-) The press has made a surprise fortune on this story, and as the public’s interest wanes, the reporters continually try to find new ways to create an artificial market for these “new” stories. They are like the birds at my feeder. Even when it’s empty, they keep coming back because it was filled yesterday. :-)
Great analogy, @marcin! We can think of the meaning of “bird brains” with it!
Works for me! Anyplace where we can find them?
Avoid people with degrees in journalism or English. Focus on literate blue-collar types and rednecks.
I shouldn’t make fun of people. :-) The truth is that there is a large market still for these stories–and it has nothing to do with Trump. For a lot of people–my three kids, for example–theirs has been a noble effort to save the lives of older people like me. :-) They follow these stories and try hard to do everything right. :-) They are good people. :-) They never litter, they are polite to everyone, they work hard and pay their bills and taxes, and they wear masks and keep their social distances. :-) I love them to pieces and only wish I could get them to relax. :-)
If the economy before the virus hit was Trump’s fault, then I want more of it!
No, no, no! Doesn’t fit the narrative, @stad! Now go to your room!
But for the disaster for the country…
It will be fascinating to see how this turns out. The progressives are placing a big bet: (1) inflict as much pain on those least able to live with it and blame it on Trump, (2) implement voting procedures for 2020 that have the most risk of fraud and thus making the outcome susceptible to credible concerns of legitimacy, and (3) running an amiable husk of an aged white man with the express or implied promise that someone else will be calling the shots and transforming America (Obama?). If they succeed they will be persuaded that they can do anything, and probably will. If they fail narrowly, it’s on to the 2022 mid-term elections immediately with scorched earth all the way. But if they fail spectacularly, will the American people have had enough and begin to exact some retribution? It’s a cliff hanger.
I wish it were obvious!
Someone should write a post on ALL the things the Dems do to rip off an election. He or she might have to post it in two parts!
Everything is to gain power. Everything.
Democrats, and I mena the voters too, just no longer see us as humans.
Why look at the opposition media and declare journalism is broken? In most cases there is no journalism there. And, yes, those grifters and frauds at CNN and the New York Times and MSNBC and the rest must be called on that. But if the conversation is about the quality of journalism, then let’s not overlook the best and brightest. Journalism is a market, pointing to corrupt clowns like Jim Acosta and stopping just imbues despair.
I’m sure I have left out a few.
It was this very issue that prompted my recent post: “What Journalism Publications Do You Recommend?” which brought some more to my attention. It’s behind the paywall, but trial memberships are affordable, I’m told.
And, as much as I dislike the man’s rudeness and self-absorption, if the republic survives another four years, it will be entirely Trump’s fault.
Point One
Connecticut State Lab Finds 90 False Positives Out Of 144 Coronavirus Tests Administered In Mid-June
“90 people in the state of Connecticut were found to actually have been negative for coronavirus after receiving positive tests, MSN reported on Tuesday.
The state’s Department of Public Health said that its state laboratory found a “flaw” in one of its testing systems and that 90 of 144 people who were tested for the virus between June 15 and June 17 received false positive tests. 161 specimens were collected and a total of 91 of those showed false positives.
Many of those who received the false tests were nursing home residents.
The state said that it reported the flaw to the test manufacturer and the FDA. It has taken “immediate steps” to make sure patients have been notified – hopefully more than just forwarding them a copy of this article. “
Gee, How convenient for those wanting to lock us down forever to way overstate CoronaVirus Test positives! The question is how prevalent is this false testing that is clearly designed to inflame public opinion against Trump?
Point Two
from Paul Joseph Watson at Summit News:
New Poll Shows More White Americans Now Oppose Black Lives Matter Than Support
After enjoying a surge in support following the death of George Floyd, a new polls reveals that a majority of Americans now oppose the Black Lives Matter movement.
The survey, conducted by Civiqs, shows that in early June, 44 per cent of Americans supported BLM and 34 per cent opposed it.
However, those numbers have now changed, with 41 per cent supporting BLM and 44 per cent opposing the movement.
However, those numbers have now changed, with 41 per cent supporting BLM and 44 per cent opposing the movement.
Source: Civiqs.com
“This is a return to normalcy more than anything,” commented one
Despite the round the clock drumbeat by the Media to support Black Lives Matter, public opinion at least among White People has turned against Black Lives Matter, and I think one should expect that support for BLM will fall at least to the minority opinion position it held months ago, if not lower given all the violence done in it’s name.
There are good ones out there, especially the Hemingways. Plus there are John Solomon, Salena Zito, Margot Cleveland, Sharyl Attkisson, and of course Lileks. But can you cite any in the ranks of NBC, CBS, or ABC News? Or at PBS?
Catherine Herridge, who I always trusted at Fox News, is now with CBS.
Glad you mentioned those, Zito and Attkission especially. As for @jameslileks, his gift for sarcasm and irony is awe inspiring, but I would never say so because it might go to his head.
Something strange is happening at CBS. They seem to be swimming back toward the middle and doing pieces that are not just orange man bad nonsense. Otherwise, I don’t consume enough of the product’s you ask about to form an opinion owing to so many bad examples and my personal impatience with the video format. Just too slow and shallow.
John Batchelor is on the ABC Radio Network four hours a night and is simply excellent. Just heard a segment from him about Twitter with Zito.
NPR is a running advertisement for government. I win bets with NPR listeners who tell me it’s non-commercial by pointing out that there are three promotional messages or more for government programs and policies every five minutes.
I found myself saying “YUP” out loud as I read this.
Several weeks ago I was watching Panic Porn – err — CNN. And they had a story about a 30-something guy in Texas who was in the ICU. The whole B block of the segment was about him. The reporter was saying “he is in radiology and it takes a whole team of nurses to help him get imaging because he’s hooked up to so many tubes etc.” In the background, despite the blurring, you could see why. The guy was many hundreds of pounds. Any serious respiratory virus would’ve landed him in intensive care. It feels like purposeful manipulation. They are trying to scare us. And I don’t trust any of the coverage as a result.
There is no such thing as journalists. There is only political operatives claiming that mantle. It has always been that way but nowadays they are no longer trying to hide their bias.
I don’t necessarily agree, Bethany. We don’t have a cohort of jornos (a word autocorrect wants to be morons – hah!) sitting on a mountain of facts, wondering how they can play the deets to terrify the booboisie. From my experience, they believe this is a thing of hideous seriousness, and as with other matters of Grave Import, it’s their duty to communicate the seriousness.
Why? I suspect it comes from the emotional and intellectual disposition of modern journalists, who are inclined to catastrophism and cynicism. If you come of age in a hothouse culture where Everything is Awful, and optimism and cheer are signs that you’re just not paying attention, then the only possible filter for your camera is the darkest one. This posture is the default, and indicates you are the inheritors of all the “question authority” shades who have populated the profession for decades. The instinct abates somewhat when confronting liberal institutions and individuals – they are open to critique, of course, but their politics give them a penumbra of virtue that softens the cynical approach.
The journos also invest mystical powers in Presidents, which makes them haloed light bringers, or churlish brutes unwilling to pull the magic levers. I’ve read the coverage of the Obama era flu: it was, shall we say, gentle: it’s the flu, it happens. Almost an act of God, and you can’t really slight our terrestrial angel for his response. But Trump is entirely responsible for this, because he could have Done The Things, and hence we’re in this mess. It is important that people realize the extent of the mess and draw the proper conclusions.
That this happens to align with liberal prescriptions is, of course, the usual coincidence.
It goes even further than just blaming President Trump. Anything that might absolve him of the tiniest smidgen of fault is covered up misrepresented. This is most obvious in relation to China, the original source of the virus and all-round malefactor. While it persecutes minorities, takes over Hong Kong, and kills Indian soldiers inside India, it is given a complete pass, to the extent that is is on the brink of taking a seat on the UN Human Rights Council- where it will fit in perfectly. But criticising China is seen as vindicating Trump, so it is verboten. Likewise the WHO.
You’re probably right, @jameslileks, which makes their behavior even more disturbing. This is the narcissism of those who think they are the only ones who can save us. Blech.
Haha! I like it!
Tragedy sells. Catastrophe is tragedy on steroids.
I think there’s another factor in the public’s and press’s reaction to the spread of this virus: the entire preventive health movement. I’m sure it’s done some good, but it has been expensive, and there’s been a social downside. When combined with socialized medicine (“if you don’t take care of yourself, you’re spending precious resources that belong to the group who decide who is truly deserving of it because they have done everything right in taking care of themselves”), it has turned people against each other. And it has made us all extremely judgmental about the physical fitness of others. It has brought out the worst of our competitive selves: “That guy should lose weight.” “That person brought her problems all on herself by not getting enough exercise–I’m absolved from caring about her.”
Today, it is manifesting in our watching each other for signs of others’ making mistakes in mask wearing and social distancing and so on. That is playing to our worst competitive selves. Competition is great in some areas of life, but in others, it would be better if we shut it off. :-)
Worst of all, though, the preventive health movement has focused people’s attention on themselves (which leads to poor mental health) rather than on helping others. Your measurement as to how good a citizen you are has to do with your weight, not your good works. We go to the doctor now and wait for a report card and a parental pat on the head, and some positive reinforcement for the work we do in monitoring our sugar intake. Preventive healthcare has become an international obsession–I have only to look at the Internet to see the truth of that. Weather reports and health news are the top of the list of click bait articles.
The success of the preventive health movement has created an illusion that people and doctors can control human health to an unrealistic extent. Instead of simply being grateful to God for our good health brought about by science and medicine, using that strength and energy to help others, it becomes something we cling to in fear. We don’t want to lose the richness of our daily life, a richness that we have earned through our hard work in getting our exercise and eating “right.”
We live in a pretty world. Everything looks so magically clean and orderly around us. But that impression is not entirely accurate of what it means to be a part of the messy, gritty, and mostly unpredictable natural world. We human beings are smart and can do some amazing things, but there’s a lot of our existence that is simply in God’s hands, not our own. I am struck by that truth every time I see news photos of tornado damage.
Or they could just be ratings-driven whores, damn the consequences.
And when we cling to our fear and are self-absorbed, we have no desire to reach out to others. After all, they could be the potential source of my undoing, i.e., illness. Good points, @marcin.
I think the media would like to damage Trump and Republican governors in toss-up states. The attacks on DeSantis, for instance, I don’t believe had much to do with concern for my parents. I don’t think that is their only goal, however.
One explanation is that there is quite a bit of risk aversion is setting in, and it is reflected in this tendency to believe that overstating the likely immediately observable harms from rising cases (up to deaths) is the best way to approach reporting on the pandemic. It “feels” easier to say: “Well, I thought a million people would die, but because we acted with caution a lot less people died.” Than it is to say: “Well I thought we’d have 5,000 deaths but we had more.”
Does this take into account trade offs, or harms that are not easily observed? No. Is that a major problem in framing the issue? Yes. What can we do about it? I don’t know.
Okay, I did. Now what?