Does the media ‘condition’ readers/viewers to achieve a preferred public opinion?
The New York Times, ‘Fighting Election Results, Trump Employs New Weapon: The Government’, Peter Baker/Lara Jakes, 11/10/2020
Quote from article: “Throughout his presidency, Mr. Trump has tried to condition much of the American public not to believe anyone other than him, with evident success.”
The article’s eighth paragraph explains that Trump exercises a practice of conditioning the public, ostensibly through word and deed. OK, I’ll buy that, he’s Donald Trump … businessman extraordinaire. Just ask him. But, he’s also President of the United States and conditioning public opinion is part of the job. Every President does it, including the man who intends to be President, Joe Biden and so did Barack Obama who did a fine job of public conditioning before enacting the medical insurance act bearing his name. You know, the one Pelosi conditioned the House of Representatives to approve in order to ‘find out what’s in it.’ Now, why would ‘professional’ reporters want to portray political conditioning as evil, but only when Trump does it? Why does the media only elucidate one side of the nation’s political disposition as being legitimate? Isn’t that what happens in China, Russia and other dictatorial nations? How soon will social media platforms be monitored to police dissenting opinions? Is the media ‘conditioning’ the public to accept a ‘dictatorial’ democracy it finds more preferable to the one that exists now?
- DanLv 63 months agoFavorite Answer
Duh...yeah. There's current turmoil within journalism over this problem. Some editors have been fired or have resigned for refusing to be liberal activists.
Here's an article about surveys of journalists:
The survey shows 1. Journalist are overwhelmingly liberals. 2. Journalists believe it is their job to guide people in what to think.
Some journalists from NY Times said blatantly that journalistic activism is justified because they're on the right side of history.
I never read NY Times anymore, they're no longer reputable. But their articles spam google search.
- ?Lv 53 months ago
It's not dissenting OPINIONS that are the problem...its dissenting FACTS that make him a danger. He LIES to you people and you all eat it up. So you'd rather be told what you WANT to hear than the truth? Despicable...get your 'facts' from OUTSIDE the U.S. There's nothing in it for them to lie...so they tell the truth on the BBC or CBC in Canada.
- RickLv 73 months ago
they certainly TRY to ..........................