Videos of local news anchors reading the seemingly same script in a segment decrying "biased and false news" on Sinclair-owned TV stations is raising questions about the media company after the videos attracted attention online.
...
Many viewers saw similarities in the language used in the various segments that aired on the local stations over the past few weeks with the rhetoric that President Donald Trump has used to slam the mainstream media.
Trump is now wading into the debate himself, voicing his support for Sinclair this morning on Twitter.
...
The practices by Sinclair Broadcast Group, the country's largest broadcaster, have been subject to media scrutiny in the past weeks and months over what critics say are efforts by the company to promote a conservative agenda. Sinclair currently owns 31 stations affiliated with ABC.
...
CNN first reported on March 7 that Sinclair called for stations to air an "anchor delivered journalistic responsibility message."
The segment prompted local anchors and individuals who work at the stations to anonymously tell CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter how they found it "manipulative" and that people were "uncomfortable doing it."
Livingston responded to CNN about the promo message, saying that such messages "are very common in our industry" and that this particular promo "addresses the troubling trend of false stories on social media, and distinguishes our trusted local stations as news destinations where we are committed to honest and accurate reporting."
The segments were slated to air in March after the publication of the CNN story.
When they did, a video director at website Deadspin made a supercut of various local anchors at different Sinclair stations reading the near-identical script.
The anchors conclude the 60-75 second segment by encouraging viewers to comment on their website if they see a segment on their channel where “our coverage is unfair.” The CNN report stated that internal documents noted how Sinclair corporate would “monitor the comments and send replies to your audience on your behalf.”
Blackhawk wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:38 am
One of these days, I'm going to read a $iljanus post without continuing into the signature and trying to figure out the relevance of the Pope to the discussion.
Also, if "Deep State" is defined "as a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy" - considering whom we have for elected officials these days, I'm not sure which one I'd prefer, honestly.
Videos of local news anchors reading the seemingly same script in a segment decrying "biased and false news" on Sinclair-owned TV stations is raising questions about the media company after the videos attracted attention online.
...
Many viewers saw similarities in the language used in the various segments that aired on the local stations over the past few weeks with the rhetoric that President Donald Trump has used to slam the mainstream media.
Trump is now wading into the debate himself, voicing his support for Sinclair this morning on Twitter.
...
The practices by Sinclair Broadcast Group, the country's largest broadcaster, have been subject to media scrutiny in the past weeks and months over what critics say are efforts by the company to promote a conservative agenda. Sinclair currently owns 31 stations affiliated with ABC.
...
CNN first reported on March 7 that Sinclair called for stations to air an "anchor delivered journalistic responsibility message."
The segment prompted local anchors and individuals who work at the stations to anonymously tell CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter how they found it "manipulative" and that people were "uncomfortable doing it."
Livingston responded to CNN about the promo message, saying that such messages "are very common in our industry" and that this particular promo "addresses the troubling trend of false stories on social media, and distinguishes our trusted local stations as news destinations where we are committed to honest and accurate reporting."
The segments were slated to air in March after the publication of the CNN story.
When they did, a video director at website Deadspin made a supercut of various local anchors at different Sinclair stations reading the near-identical script.
The anchors conclude the 60-75 second segment by encouraging viewers to comment on their website if they see a segment on their channel where “our coverage is unfair.” The CNN report stated that internal documents noted how Sinclair corporate would “monitor the comments and send replies to your audience on your behalf.”
So I told two anchors. Then she told two anchors. And so on, and so on, and so on!
"Who's going to tell him that the job he's currently seeking might just be one of those Black jobs?"
-Michelle Obama 2024 Democratic Convention
Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
Blackhawk wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:38 am
One of these days, I'm going to read a $iljanus post without continuing into the signature and trying to figure out the relevance of the Pope to the discussion.
Blackhawk wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:38 am
One of these days, I'm going to read a $iljanus post without continuing into the signature and trying to figure out the relevance of the Pope to the discussion.
Holman wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:25 pm
In addition, we're now learning that the U.S. expelled various Russian personnel but did not reduce the size of the Russian diplomatic mission (as Britain and other allies did, and as Russia did when expelling our people).
This means the Russians can just slot new people into the old positions. It's like Trump's move was calculated to look like a response without inconveniencing Putin in any serious way.
Julian Borger wrote:State Department confirms that Russia can replace the diplomats, alleged to be intel officers, expelled last week.
US "is not requiring the Russian bilateral mission to reduce its total number of personnel" a spox says. New accreditation to be reviewed on a "case-by-case basis.”
Garry Kasparov wrote:The Kremlin was boasting and laughing about this on Russian TV two days ago. Putin enjoys showing there’s no limit to the humiliation Trump will accept from him. Helps him rally his gang facing sanctions.
So it's a complete sham. And not only is Putin not being punished, he's being rewarded with a state visit.
I was so dying to give him something over expelling Russian diplomats. Even it wasn't huge at least it was some sort of optics he's not in Putin's pocket. Is it 2020 yet?
I am right about Amazon costing the United States Post Office massive amounts of money for being their Delivery Boy. Amazon should pay these costs (plus) and not have them bourne by the American Taxpayer. Many billions of dollars. P.O. leaders don’t have a clue (or do they?)!
So... Postal authorities are complicit with the Amazon Deep State? This is not to be bourne!
(This morning's meltdown is brought to you by Rosenstein's explicit re-affirmation last night that the investigation must be allowed to run its course and follow where the facts lead, including into crimes of tax evasion and money-laundering.)
Can someone remind me what Amazon did to get in his cross-hairs? It’s a freaking economic engine in this country. Why is Trump taking shots at it? Is it Bezos?
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
Kurth wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 10:59 am
Can someone remind me what Amazon did to get in his cross-hairs? It’s a freaking economic engine in this country. Why is Trump taking shots at it? Is it Bezos?
He's really attacking the Washington Post, which is owned by Bezos.
LordMortis wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:31 am
I was so dying to give him something over expelling Russian diplomats. Even it wasn't huge at least it was some sort of optics he's not in Putin's pocket. Is it 2020 yet?
This is also part of how Trump is so adept at manipulating the media. Most people will see the headline "Trump expels Russian diplomats". The follow-up details of how the U.S. "is not requiring the Russian bilateral mission to reduce its total number of personnel" will be seen by many fewer people, and even fewer people will understand what that means.
Basically Trump knows how to produce the headlines that he wants (and minimize the headlines that he doesn't want), especially on cable news. And not that many people go beyond the headline in depth.
Trump continues his self-destructiveness by attacking one of his few remaining allies - Wall Street. One wonders how long the volatility coming out of this administration will remain acceptable risk to stockholders.
Kurth wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 10:59 am
Can someone remind me what Amazon did to get in his cross-hairs? It’s a freaking economic engine in this country. Why is Trump taking shots at it? Is it Bezos?
He's really attacking the Washington Post, which is owned by Bezos.
It's also personal. Bezos is everything Trump is not: a successful businessman who doesn't need to hide his wealth because he earned it legally. Plus, he's worth something like 20x Trump's estimated net worth. Plus, he's liberal. Plus, he's bald and has a self-effacing sense of humor. Trump's hatred for Bezos goes way back.
YellowKing wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:16 am
self-destructiveness
?
At this point, can we still call it that? There are no consequences. Ever.
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
Kurth wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 10:59 am
Can someone remind me what Amazon did to get in his cross-hairs? It’s a freaking economic engine in this country. Why is Trump taking shots at it? Is it Bezos?
He's really attacking the Washington Post, which is owned by Bezos.
It's also personal. Bezos is everything Trump is not: a successful businessman who doesn't need to hide his wealth because he earned it legally. Plus, he's worth something like 20x Trump's estimated net worth. Plus, he's liberal. Plus, he's bald and has a self-effacing sense of humor. Trump's hatred for Bezos goes way back.
I don't know Jeff's personal history, but I'm guessing he didn't get a 200 million dollar head start from daddy.
"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow
The other thing about Amazon is that there are non-frivolous antitrust issues with their business dominance and conduct that people have been pushing for a few years now. I'm a little more on the skeptical side of those arguments, but they're credible enough. Which gives Trump semi-defensible grounds to sick the DOJ on Amazon. On the one hand any sort of case would be tainted by Trump's tweets, which might give them less credibility, but on the other hand it gives Trump an opening to cause pain to a thorn in his side on defensible grounds while everyone knows what the case is *really* about.
Especially if the GOP holds both chambers of Congress, the odds that DOJ opens an antitrust inquiry into Amazon before the end of 2019 is probably 80%+.
Last edited by El Guapo on Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
YellowKing wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:16 am
Trump continues his self-destructiveness by attacking one of his few remaining allies - Wall Street. One wonders how long the volatility coming out of this administration will remain acceptable risk to stockholders.
I have been wondering when the business world would get annoyed by him. So far, I think they've calculated that he is doing more for them than against them. Additionally, money has been weaponized in politics but it is bundled through relatively few organizations. They have more power and are aligned with Trump at present.
YellowKing wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:16 am
Trump continues his self-destructiveness by attacking one of his few remaining allies - Wall Street. One wonders how long the volatility coming out of this administration will remain acceptable risk to stockholders.
There were a few episodes in 2017 where Trump's tweets about a company hurt that company directly. The impact seems to have been unintended at that time, but with these Amazon attacks he is learning that he can directly weaponize his stubby tweeting fingers to hurt his enemies' bottom line.
I would expect more of this before it's over. With Hope Hicks gone and John Kelly out of favor, there's really no one with the stature to limit Trump's public statements.
This is authoritarian strong-man stuff, obviously, but that hardly even registers as surprising any more.
RunningMn9 wrote:At this point, can we still call it that? There are no consequences. Ever.
Oh I think there are consequences, but they are bigger than Trump himself. I think we're struggling to see the big picture because we're living in the history, but years from now Trump will be the straw that broke the back of the Republican party. We'll see a more progressive America come out of this, a more politically motivated population, and a new brand of conservatism that shuns the poison of the alt-right movement.
I know, I know, I'm being hopelessly naive and optimistic. Maybe I am. But that's what I sincerely believe at the moment. I don't think we'd see a #MeToo or a #NeverAgain under Hillary. Trump has produced seismic (relatively speaking) shifts in society that only hurt his cause. He's planting seeds that have yet to bear fruit.
RunningMn9 wrote:At this point, can we still call it that? There are no consequences. Ever.
Oh I think there are consequences, but they are bigger than Trump himself. I think we're struggling to see the big picture because we're living in the history, but years from now Trump will be the straw that broke the back of the Republican party. We'll see a more progressive America come out of this, a more politically motivated population, and a new brand of conservatism that shuns the poison of the alt-right movement.
I know, I know, I'm being hopelessly naive and optimistic. Maybe I am. But that's what I sincerely believe at the moment. I don't think we'd see a #MeToo or a #NeverAgain under Hillary. Trump has produced seismic (relatively speaking) shifts in society that only hurt his cause. He's planting seeds that have yet to bear fruit.
YellowKing wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:20 pmOh I think there are consequences, but they are bigger than Trump himself. I think we're struggling to see the big picture because we're living in the history, but years from now Trump will be the straw that broke the back of the Republican party. We'll see a more progressive America come out of this, a more politically motivated population, and a new brand of conservatism that shuns the poison of the alt-right movement.
I know, I know, I'm being hopelessly naive and optimistic. Maybe I am. But that's what I sincerely believe at the moment. I don't think we'd see a #MeToo or a #NeverAgain under Hillary. Trump has produced seismic (relatively speaking) shifts in society that only hurt his cause. He's planting seeds that have yet to bear fruit.
I want to believe that all of this is true. I don't believe that any of this is true.
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
YellowKing wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:20 pmOh I think there are consequences, but they are bigger than Trump himself. I think we're struggling to see the big picture because we're living in the history, but years from now Trump will be the straw that broke the back of the Republican party. We'll see a more progressive America come out of this, a more politically motivated population, and a new brand of conservatism that shuns the poison of the alt-right movement.
I know, I know, I'm being hopelessly naive and optimistic. Maybe I am. But that's what I sincerely believe at the moment. I don't think we'd see a #MeToo or a #NeverAgain under Hillary. Trump has produced seismic (relatively speaking) shifts in society that only hurt his cause. He's planting seeds that have yet to bear fruit.
I want to believe that all of this is true. I don't believe that any of this is true.
GreenGoo wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:26 pm
I thought it was illegal to deploy the military on US soil?
I believe you are correct but that doesn't mean shit and neither do Trump's claims so.......when it happens then I'll believe it. Until then it is just more poison orange juice spewing forth from the over ripe asshole in the oval office.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
GreenGoo wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:26 pm
I thought it was illegal to deploy the military on US soil?
There is precedent. GW Bush and Obama did it but used National Guard troops vs active duty troops. From a Politico article, Gen. Mattis doesn't support armed military personnel guarding the border. I wonder if the General's days are numbered when Bolton and Fox News moves into the White House...
Operation Jump Start was a military operation to aid U.S. Customs and Border Protection, announced by President George W. Bush in May 2006. The mission entailed the deployment of United States National Guard troops along the Mexico–United States border for purposes of enforcement of border security and construction of a border fence. The rules of deployment were defined in a memorandum of agreement between officials in the Department of Defense and the governors of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas as well as Mexico.
National Guard members involved in the operation were not involved in law enforcement activities due to the political aspect of the US military on the US/Mexico border. They were supporting the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Border Patrol agencies with administrative, observational and intelligence gathering capacities, and civil engineering projects. By temporarily taking over these functions from the USC&BP, they freed up sworn agents to field units.
Military operations with Operation Jump Start were primarily to observe and report. The rules of engagement for the operation was very restrictive and only allowed escalation to lethality when met with an equal amount of force from another. The US military set up entry identification team sites to spot undocumented aliens. Many of the areas of operation were in desolate locations; some locations were so remote that troops were sometimes flown in by UH-60 helicopter.
I have a feeling though that The Toddler envisions tanks and Apache helicopters going up and down the border. He's probably moving some miniatures around on a big map as we speak...
"Who's going to tell him that the job he's currently seeking might just be one of those Black jobs?"
-Michelle Obama 2024 Democratic Convention
Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
GreenGoo wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:26 pm
I thought it was illegal to deploy the military on US soil?
There is precedent. GW Bush and Obama did it but using National Guard troops vs active duty troops. From a Politico article, Gen. Mattis doesn't support armed military personnel guarding the border. I wonder if the General's days are numbered when Bolton and Fox News moves into the White House...
Regarding the past uses
Active duty U.S. troops were not used for the operation since there are prohibitions on using so-called Title 10 troops for law enforcement and similar duties within the United States
So the laws are there for other than NG troops.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
Right, it’s specifically what the NG is for (domestic deployment). Although doesn’t the NG report to the governors rather than the Toddler?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
RunningMn9 wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:57 pm
Right, it’s specifically what the NG is for (domestic deployment). Although doesn’t the NG report to the governors rather than the Toddler?
It's possible (but unlikely) that Trump means the National Guard not "Title 10" troops. It's also possible (and more likely) that the military / Mattis will generously interpret any order from Trump to deploy "the military" on the border as an order to deploy the National Guard, and act accordingly.
I'm sure the National Guard will be thrilled to leave their civilian jobs and keep the border secure from the Brown Menace for an unspecified amount of time...
"Who's going to tell him that the job he's currently seeking might just be one of those Black jobs?"
-Michelle Obama 2024 Democratic Convention
Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
