Proposed solution for Trump propaganda: "truth sandwich" reporting

He’s the president of the US. As @anon21100188 notes, the things he does shapes the country and the world. I’m not sure ignoring the president of the US whoever they are, solves the problem.


The proposed solution would never be seen by portion of the electorate that only go to FOX or Breitbart for their “facts”. Still worth a try, though.


We’re gonna need a bigger boat.

1 Like

SInce this is a problem, then this needs to change… back. I’m pretty sure that the idea that news must be unbiased is a pretty recent development. Also, Impossible.


Splinter regularly publishes his unedited remarks and tweets with annotations, such as this story from today, in which Trump went on a lie-filled anti-immigration rant at a National Space Council meeting.




Can’t corroborate NPR, but I’ve heard Hari Sreenivasan do this on the PBS Newshour in the past couple of days. I loved it.


If the news media were responsive to the needs of the nation, Trump couldn’t have gotten elected in the first place.


Sure, this is certainly true, but other than Progressive web blogs, no other media will follow through with this type of reporting and journalism. And this would just be the start of trying to turn around the Titanic before it hits the iceberg. There are hard fact, practical answers to all of our problems in this world. We don’t need all of this greed and death and poverty, degradation of the environment and our own ultimate demise. We have the answers at our fingertips here and now. But nobody has the political fortitude and will to implement the practices needed to bring about a truly wonderful world for all. Just sit down to dinner with my family and know that all is lost. I don’t think we can save ourselves any longer. If aliens with good will and beneficial intent do not drop down out of the sky to guide us through the keyhole, we’re fucked.

That, that is incredible. The shapes those people will twist themselves into to keep liking this abomination!

Oh, they never liked him. They simply despised him the least of all available choices. They weren’t offered the opportunity to vote for anyone they liked.

Speaking only for the small group of Trump voters I know, obviously, because that’s all I know about :slight_smile: .

How is this not default journalistic behavior? It’s the only way to deal with a habitual liar without simply benefiting them. There’s also the whole issue of false equivalencies in trying to be “balanced” in the sense of holding “both sides” to task regardless of what they’re doing - the one side that’s willing to abandon all pretense of behavioral standards wins in that situation as well. I suppose the Republican - that is, the Trump - party has embraced both these things, having discovered that abandoning ethical behavior and blatantly lying at all times is an advantageous strategy given the media’s approach. It won’t end until the media changes.



Which papers are you referring to? Though I am a mathematician, for some period of time in the 80s I was a RA for a computational linguist in a CS department, and had plenty of experience with his academic work. To a large extent that subfield (at least as it was then) was dominated by ideas that were obtained not through research or scholarship but through introspection, which is a really shabby way to do science. (The approach was common in German natural philosophy in the 18th and 19th centuries, eg the “science” of Goethe and Steiner, but has long been discarded in traditional fields of science.) This makes it really hard to distinguish universal truths from things that are true for a specific class of people (and the class of influential computational linguists of the period is about as homogeneous a group of people as one can imagine). There is some irony in that, given Lakoff’s views on how knowledge (like mathematics) came to be.


Resonates with an old presentation tip I was taught: primacy, frequency, recency. People remember the first thing you tell them, the thing you tell them the most and the last thing you tell them.

If you open with “President Trump tweeted/said/announced…”, repeatedly show them pics of him, his tweets, parading Presidential decrees then leave them with something else he did/said then it’s all about him. Regardless of any fact check, alternative view or opinion or evidence against his position.


I hope more news orgs take the NPR tactic of trying to distill the facts rather than default to TRUMP SAYS… or TRUMP TWEETED as their go-to news of the day. Possibly the worst way to handle this is what CNN’s been doing: seemingly alternating their editorial tone day to day as a sort of “balance” – one day they’ll be hardcore anti-Trump, with “Trump Falsely Says…” as a headline, and the next will be running “Trump Triumphs!” editorials. It’s phony, it’s transparent, and makes everything seem questionable.


I came here to say something similar. First thing I thought was “Wow, he actually looks dignified and even somewhat presidential in this one.” But, of course, it’s an idealized wax sculpture.

If an image accompanies the post, I say it’s on the table.

Looks more like former president James Polk if you ask me:

ETA: I guess it was their last resort for a “presidential” look

The worm at 538 seems to indicate that there actually is a body of people (about 16% of those polled^) who’re prepared to change their mind.

^ ‘disapprove’ min of 41.1% on Day 7, ‘disapprove’ max of 57.5% on day 331

This morning the local news did this with regard to his brain fart about Germany. Paraphrasing from memory, it went something like “this morning trump tweeted [bullshit]” which was followed up immediately with “but of course this is more of his rubbish, because [facts]”


His work on categories, that I was exposed to initially through BoingBoing’s recommendation of Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things (this book also introduced me to the work of Eleanor Rosch).

Where I think Lakoff goes astray is in his construction of metaphors for political divisions, but I got a lot of technical value from his work on grouping and taxonomy.

I can’t accurately judge CNN currently. I quit listening to them back in the GWB days. But from what you say, it sounds like they haven’t fixed what was wrong with them.