Category Archives: Media Watch

Hit job headline against President Biden

President Biden touts “Bidenomics” in Maryland

There is a strange disconnect happening in the country, between actual economic realities and people’s perception of the economy. As to the former, many of the numbers today and during President Joe Biden‘s administration are stunningly good, including solid economic growth, record job creation and low unemployment, wage growth, rebuilding our infrastructure, $160 billion in student loan forgiveness so far, and a stock market that just hit a record 40,000, causing millions of Americans’ retirement accounts to grow. Even as to persistent inflation, which began after the U.S. economy shut down during the 2020 Trump Recession, it has been heading in the right direction (steadily down), in part thanks to efforts by President Biden and the Democrats. Those efforts include passing the Inflation Reduction Act, which, among other things, capped insulin for Medicare recipients at $35 per month and extended tax credits for electric vehicles and residential and commercial solar energy installations. Moreover, record oil production under President Biden helps keep gasoline prices down.

At the same time, however, we keep hearing stories that, as Voice of America reported last January:

Despite those robust numbers, most Americans, 68%, say the economy is worsening, according to a December 2023 Gallup poll, which showed that four in five U.S. adults rate the country’s current economic conditions as “poor” (45%) or “fair” (33%). Only 19% of people polled said the economy is “good,” in keeping with the positive economic markers.

Again, somewhat oddly, the same VOA article reported:

However, Justin Wolfers, a professor of public policy and economics at the University of Michigan, questions the accuracy of polls and says people’s actions suggest they believe the economy is doing well.

“How would we figure out if the American consumer were in fact optimistic? I think the first thing you do is you look at consumption spending, because if you expect the economy to be terrible, you’d squirrel away money for this coming recession,” Wolfers said. “But instead, people have been spending money as if they believe, not only is the economy good, it’s going to continue to be good.”

Given these mixed signals at best on the economy, the Biden administration and leading Democrats likely need to do a better job communicating good news. However, it’s tough for President Biden and the Democrats to get proper credit for the success of “Bidenomics” when we have mainstream media headlines like this one from  Yahoo! Finance last Wednesday:

Grocery prices jumped 1.2% last month as food inflation returns to pre-pandemic levels.”

What a confusing and misleading headline. First, as the video and text accompanying the article indicate, grocery prices didn’t “jump” last month, they “dropped 0.2%” from the previous month (emphasis added). Second, if the relevant measure is year to year, again the video included in the article indicates that grocery prices increased 1.1 percent, not 1.2 percent. Third, as is indicated later in the text, this small increase reflects very low inflation. Grocery prices are moderating, and are now increasing well below the overall inflation rate. Indeed, the “pre-pandemic levels” part of the Yahoo! Finance headline means before the last round of inflation hit, i.e., when inflation was in the two percent range.

No one likes inflation, but what a poor job of journalism in the headline and lede of this particular story. Sadly, that is the kind of sloppy or biased reporting that occurs too much in our media. Likewise, when media outlets report good economic news, and then, often in the same sentence, state that President Biden isn’t receiving proper credit for the good economy, the outlets are perpetuating the problem.

How do we combat this kind of reporting? At minimum, we have to call it out and correct it, far and wide.

Photo by Maryland GovPics, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/so9TcZ

In university Gaza protests, 2024 is not 1968

President Biden, fighting for peace

Those old enough to remember the tumultuous year 1968, or who have studied the events of that year, know that it was an earthquake in American politics, changing the course of the nation and the world. Overhanging everything was dissatisfaction with the U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, which had been growing for several years. 1968 began with the Tet Offensive by North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces, which, though ultimately unsuccessful, inflicted many U.S. casualties and helped turn American public sentiment further against the war. On March 31, incumbent U.S. President Lyndon Johnson, facing criticism of the war effort from all sides, shockingly announced that he was ending his presidential re-election campaign. Just four days later, civil rights leader Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. , who preached nonviolent civil disobedience, was assassinated, leading to a further tearing of the fabric of our society. In June, Democratic presidential challenger Robert F. Kennedy, who based his campaign on criticism of Johnson over Vietnam, was also assassinated. By then, America had turned into a powder keg of unrest. In August, when the Democrats held their national convention in Chicago, things turned even worse, as police brutally assaulted antiwar protesters outside, while Democratic candidates and their supporters clashed politically inside the hall. As a result, Republican Richard Nixon, shrewdly campaigning on “law and order,” rode to victory.

A number of Republicans, media outlets, and even sometimes Democratic Party friend Bernie Sanders, are trying to draw parallels between 2024 and 1968. That is because currently, on the far left, there are university protests against President Joe Biden‘s support of America’s ally Israel in its war against terrorist group Hamas. Republicans, unsurprisingly, are exploiting these protests, with which they completely disagree, in order to play up criticism of President Biden and sow social disorder, which they hope could lead to a 1968-style GOP election victory. The news media, meanwhile, are more than happy to air lots of footage of the protests, giving them outsize importance.

However, 1968 and 2024 are very different. Here is a partial list of such differences:

Trump is on trial, but what should we call it?

Suggestion from the 2018 State of the Union

Donald Trump is on trial right now in New York City, facing criminal charges for “business fraud.” However, that term is really the last step that began with (1) having adulterous affairs (2) with porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal (3) just months after Trump’s wife Melania gave birth to son Barron, then (4) covering up the Daniels affair by paying $130,000 in “hush money” to Daniels (5) through Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen, as well as (6) involving the Trump-friendly National Enquirer in paying $150,000 to McDougal to kill the story of her affair with Trump, and (7) paying off a Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about a child Trump allegedly fathered out of wedlock. According to the New York prosecutors, the covering up of such payments by Trump and others constitutes falsifying New York State business records. Ultimately, all of these actions were designed to influence the 2016 presidential election by keeping important information about Trump’s character and crimes out of the news. And while the cover-ups worked to some extent in 2016, presumably the facts are not hidden anymore.

Understandably, however, the news media have had a bit of a hard time describing the subject matter of Trump’s trial for purposes of short headlines or to appeal to the short attention spans of many readers and viewers. Thus, we have seen the trial described as:

O.J. Simpson and the Norm MacDonald connection

O.J. Simpson in his TV pitchman days

As so much of the news coverage this week indicates, former football star and acquitted murder suspect O.J. Simpson died Wednesday of cancer. Simpson was preceded in death by comedian Norm MacDonald, who also died of cancer, in 2021. However, the connection between Simpson and MacDonald is much stronger than just their both having had cancer.

MacDonald was “Weekend Update” anchor on NBC‘s Saturday Night Live (SNL) from 1994-1998, coinciding with the period in which Simpson was on trial for murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, and her friend Ron Goldman. Taking advantage of the the unprecedented news coverage of the Simpson trial, MacDonald made a cottage industry out of mocking what he believed was the very guilty Simpson. MacDonald’s many hard-hitting jokes about Simpson’s guilt have been collected on YouTube and can be found here and here. Perhaps MacDonald’s most infamous O.J. joke on SNL came after the jury acquitted Simpson of murder in 1995. MacDonald said: “Well, it is finally official: murder is legal in the state of California.” Eventually, this relentless mockery of Simpson led to Norm being fired, reportedly because NBC West Coast division President Don Ohlmeyer was a close friend of Simpson and could no longer stand to see his buddy kicked around on TV by MacDonald. As the previous link indicates, Rolling Stone magazine dubbed NBC’s MacDonald firing number four on its list of “The 50 Worst Decisions in TV History.”

NBC News fails political test with Ronna Romney McDaniel

NBC’s peacock, now with ruffled feathers

NBC News a/k/a NBCUniversal News Group (which includes NBC News, MSNBC and CNBC) suffered an embarrassing setback this week, as it was pressured into letting go former Republican National Committee (RNC) Chair Ronna Romney McDaniel just days after hiring her at MSNBC. A swift outcry from the public and, incredibly, some of NBC News’ well-known anchors, made it clear that McDaniel’s position at the company was untenable. These events also provide some lessons into what a television or cable TV “news” network should and should not do when it comes to politics.

First, we can stipulate that it is not out of bounds or even unusual for a TV news network to hire political people. Unfortunately, TV and other news media now largely focus on politics, something for which we often criticize them. No sooner do we see coverage of some news event (for example, the recent Francis Scott Key Bridge accident in Baltimore) than the coverage turns political, with TV panel discussions (or politicians’ statements in print or social media) about how the role of government or the current administration is somehow involved, and with the political folks at these media outlets retreating to their predictable political camps and talking points. Accordingly, those who watch broadcast or cable TV news will see familiar political faces such as James Carville, George Stephanopoulos (both from Bill Clinton‘s 1992 presidential campaign), Nicolle Wallace (George W. Bush‘s White House Communications Director), Michael Steele (former RNC Chair), Jen Psaki (Barack Obama‘s White House Communications Director), etc. on a regular basis, in addition to a bevy of guests with political jobs.

The difference here with Ronna Romney McDaniel is that, as RNC Chair during Donald Trump‘s White House term, including before, during and after the 2020 presidential election, she actively participated in the Trump/Republican attempt to nullify, overturn and steal the election. That is what triggered the immediate backlash from the public and from very prominent NBC News and MSNBC hosts such as Chuck Todd (who is NBC News’ Chief Political Analyst), Joe Scarborough, his Morning Joe co-host Mika Brzezinski, and Rachel Maddow. As Brzezinski stated on-air last Monday:

To be clear, we believe NBC News should seek out conservative Republican voices to provide balance in their election coverage. But it should be conservative Republicans, not a person who used her position of power to be an anti-democracy election denier. And we hope NBC will reconsider its decision.

It’s Super Bowl Sunday, and Republicans are terrified of Taylor Swift

Latest Republican obsession Taylor Swift

Of all the bizarre, circus-like political outbursts from Republicans in the past eight years or more, one of the silliest has to be the GOP’s explosion of fear over pop music star Taylor Swift. That Republican terror is set to peak this Sunday during the Super Bowl, which features the Kansas City Chiefs versus the San Francisco 49ers, and which is being played, appropriately, in Las Vegas.

For those few who haven’t been exposed to this latest circus, Taylor Swift is a singer-songwriter who has millions of fans, has won multiple Grammy awards, has sold approximately 200 million records worldwide (near the top of the all-time list for musical artists), and encourages her fans to register to vote. Swift also dates Kansas City Chiefs football player Travis Kelce. Swift often attends Kelce’s games, during which the broadcast network airing such games invariably turns the cameras on Swift, wearing a Chiefs jersey and cheering from the skybox, for a few fleeting seconds here and there.

The last two parts are what terrify Republicans, including those at Fox “News.” They have lashed out at Swift, the National Football League (NFL), and even President Joe Biden‘s administration. These Republicans first charged that Swift is part of a Biden administration “Pentagon psy-ops” effort. Okay, that doesn’t even make sense. Now Republicans also say that the NFL rigged the entire 2023-24 season in order to put the Chiefs into the Super Bowl so that Taylor Swift can be featured prominently for political reasons. Okay, that also doesn’t even … you get the idea.

Can we please stop talking about Trump’s fee-fees?

Guess who’s picture is not being featured?

Over the past several years, especially since Donald Trump was defeated for re-election and Joe Biden became President of the United States, there has been a weird and annoying trend in the news: when something big happens, when some important action or decision takes place, instead of the story being the thing that happened, the focus (as evidenced by the news story headline and lede) becomes about how Donald Trump reacted to it. For example, take a look at these stories:

New York Times: Trump Rages at U.A.W. President After Biden Endorsement

Clearly, the important story is that the United Auto Workers union endorsed President Joe Biden for re-election, not how Trump feels about it (quite obviously, he wouldn’t be happy not to get the union’s endorsement).

CNBC: Trump lashes out at financial monitor in business fraud case after she reports errors

Once again, the real story here is that the independent financial monitor in the Trump business fraud case in New York has found serious irregularities in the Trump Organization’s business operations, including a questionable $48 million loan. Surely, it is not a surprise, and not the main story, that Trump is unhappy about the monitor uncovering his potential wrongdoings.

The Guardian: Angry Trump fumes after $83.3m damages ruling in E Jean Carroll case

By now, you can identify the pattern. The big headline should be that a Manhattan jury ordered Trump to pay E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million dollars for defaming her in 2019 after she accused him of an earlier rape. That Trump was then “angry” about being hit with such a huge verdict is merely a very foreseeable consequence.

Two ways to spin Trump’s Iowa caucus win

The media’s dream for the Republican primaries

Last Monday night, as expected Donald Trump won the 2024 Iowa Republican presidential caucus. Trump’s win, with 51 percent of the vote, ahead of Ron DeSantis (21.2 percent) and Nimarata Nikki Haley (19.1 percent), was the largest margin of victory in Iowa Republican presidential caucus history. Indeed, the Associated Press called the contest for Trump just 30 minutes after the polls had closed, and other news outlets quickly followed suit.

At the same time, however, some Democrats, such as Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, said that the Iowa results showed “the weakness of Donald Trump.” According to Pritzker, “Almost half of the base of the Republican Party showing up for this caucus tonight voted against Donald Trump.” Pritzker added that the Iowa results were therefore a good sign for President Joe Biden, who is running for re-election.

The 2024 presidential primaries are coming up fast, with controversy

Vermin Supreme, 2024 New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary candidate

It’s hard to believe, but the first 2024 presidential primary contest is just 11 days away. Specifically, on January 15, Iowa will hold its Republican presidential caucus. In advance of the Iowa GOP caucus, CNN is holding another Republican presidential debate just five days beforehand, on January 10. However, only three candidates qualified for the CNN debate: Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis and Nimarata Nikki Haley. Since Trump previously announced that he was skipping these debates, it will be just DeSantis and Haley, who are dead even in the Republican polls (though both are way behind Trump), flinging mud at each other. Both DeSantis and Haley are spending millions of dollars (either directly or via supportive PACs) to attack the other.

Eight days after the Iowa caucus, on January 23, comes the New Hampshire primaries, both on the Democratic and Republican side. Here’s where the controversy begins, and it’s with the Democrats. At the urging of President Joe Biden and his campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) voted in favor of asking New Hampshire and Iowa to move their primary and caucus, respectively, to a later date, after that of South Carolina (which holds its 2024 Democratic primary on February 3), in order to “increase diversity” at the front end of the primary process. However, while Iowa agreed to move its Democratic caucus back to March 5, New Hampshire closely holds onto its first-in-the-nation primary status, which is written into state law, and both New Hampshire Democrats and Republicans (including Republican Governor Chris Sununu and Republican Secretary of State David Scanlan) opposed any such change.

To tout President Biden’s accomplishments, make it bite-sized

President Biden boosts high-speed trains and infrastructure

As we are now less than one year from the 2024 elections, there have been some lists of President Joe Biden‘s many accomplishments floating around online, including from the White House itself. The lists are quite long and impressive, comprising legislation (American Rescue Plan, Inflation Reduction Act, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act), executive orders (creating new national monuments, steps to curb gun violence, AI safety measures, and more. These accomplishments are important to share, because mainstream media outlets often refuse to acknowledge them. However, the comprehensive lists of what President Biden has achieved can be overwhelming, especially for anyone trying to recite these accomplishments in conversation, on video, or even in writing.

Therefore, a better method might be to pick one subject at a time, and focus on that. For example, earlier this year, the Biden team began enlisting what some call “an army” of mostly young social media influencers, and even gave them a special briefing room at the White House. These influencers use social media such at TikTok to create short pieces on topics in which they have chosen to specialize, such as financial policy, gun violence, marijuana decriminalization, electric vehicles (EVs), and more.

While these social media influencers are well-known, with large audiences and familiar platforms, there is no reason why the rest of us cannot similarly use the tools of communication at our disposal — blogs, podcasts, YouTube channels, old-fashioned letters to the editor of local or national newspapers, website comments, and even face-to-face conversations with friends and family at upcoming Thanksgiving and other holiday dinners — to share all this good Biden administration news. In doing so, sticking to one topic at a time might be most palatable to those listeners and readers with short attention spans due to holiday food comas or otherwise.

Besides being able to hold people’s attention spans, a further advantage of this bite-sized approach to sharing President Biden’s accomplishments is that it lets individual Democratic voters play up the issues that are most important to them.  For instance, one who thinks climate change is the most crucial issue we face can talk about the Inflation Reduction Act, with its tax credits for EVs and solar energy installations. Another person who is most passionate about protecting abortion rights in the wake of the Republican majority U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade can bring up President Biden’s executive orders to safeguard abortion and contraception, and so on. In this manner, all of the important issues likely would get aired, no one’s eyes would glaze over with exhaustion, and President Biden would get the full credit he deserves.

Photo by Maryland GovPics, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/GaEPVS