While serving, Trump's comms director will get a $7M Fox News bonus for his mishandling of sexual abuse


#1

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/11/24/public-choice-theory.html


#2


#3

ds9-quark-shocked


#4

But he swears it won’t effect how he performs his duties in the slightest.


#5

True, the effect won’t be slight.


#6

Which is simultaneously likely true and almost certainly the last truthful thing he will say until he loses his job, which prolly won’t be that long (they seem to average under three months– Trump communications directors have the job security of a fruit-fly basically)


#7

I think it is time for serious journalists to boycott the White House.


#8

Sure. But then comes the book deal and Fox “news” tv show.


#9

It’s been suggested again and again: serious and reputable news organisations should send their interns to transcribe statements and get practise at asking legitimate questions that everyone understands will be met with lies. Maybe train them to be aggressive like Acosta, but save the analysis and framing and fact-checking for the experienced professionals back in the newsroom.

What the careerists and access journalists in the MSM have to understand is that, while being the White House correspondent is a plum gig in normal times, under this regime it carries no more extra honour and prestige than would that carried by being the playground correspondent at a junior high school.


#10

“… and the President replied, “I am rubber, you are glue… the best rubber… you’ve not seen rubber like this before… the best… saving American jobs… making America great again…What about her adhesives?”, more on this story after the commercials.”


#11

The idea has made enough sense, for long enough, that I don’t think organisational inertia alone can explain why it hasn’t happened yet. I guess it has a lot to do with the internal politics of the WH press corps and the individual news outlets. Maybe if the Washington Post sent an intern, and the NY Times didn’t, the Times reporter could lobby to get more questions based on seniority. Maybe the role is bound up with pay scales, such that reporters need their WH stint to get promoted. Maybe there is a fear that the role is vacuous and outdated anyway, and wouldn’t come back even if the country elected a President.

Which is all another way of saying that the news media is just too symbiotic with the political scene to call bullshit on it. It’s the same with how they keep reacting to Turmp’s tweets even as they print column after column saying “We Are Destroying America By Reacting to Turmp’s Tweets”.


#12

I’ve concluded the only way to get the point across anymore to 40% of America is to start calling Fox News “State TV” and Trump “Dear Leader”

think about how very high the Dear Leader’s chances of re-election are in 2020 and how State TV is going to try to destroy the democratic candidate for him (in fact all the media will to pretend to be “balanced”, this is why we can’t tolerate false equivalency ever again)


#13

Really! How much time is he serving?


#14

Only the very best people for the Trump administration. That’s what he said, so it must be true.


#15

That would leave only Trump-puppet “journalists” there to hit Trump and Sanders with the questions, and with those questions being thrown in underhanded and of the softball variety. Trump and company must be made to sweat and answer hard stuff.

Also, if what you propose were to happen, that would only be stupidly seen as a win by the Trump-tards and thereby further embolden them. They’d just kick back, put their feet up, and scarf down potato chips while watching the briefings as they only get to hear what they want to hear; they wouldn’t be exposed to hard questions and how their god-heroes respond to them.


#16

This feels kind of tame for a Trump appointee, in terms of scandal. I mean, sure, he was engaged in nastiness (and profiting from it) that indicates a total and complete lack of fitness for his current role, but that’s kind of prerequisite for Trump appointees. If he used his current role to generally be a proponent for an increase in sexual harassment in workplaces, he would start to be on par with others in this administration.


#17

He and his wife seem perfect for each other.


#18

literally all sanders does is lie. that should be hyperbole but i don’t think it is.

by repeating those lies and calling that reporting little of value gets accomplished. pretty much the opposite actually.

they’ve already moved to holding pressers just once a month, and now the reporters are going to be limited to one question - which is way worse than it even sounds because tv reporters tend to ask the same questions so that the reporting can be edited to make sense (each reporter getting captured asking about the themes of the day.)

there are other ways to be reporting on the white house. people should really be putting the focus there.


#19

… and real journalists can – and have – call her on those lies to her face and on a very visible, multi-network forum… the briefings. FOX, et al, won’t and have not.

… and if a followup question results in a ban (credentials stripped), then the reporter’s network can – like CNN has done re Acosta – file a lawsuit. Real journalists must continue to fight for a democracy that includes the right to question one’s government; a very important way of holding elected officials accountable.

… yes, there are other ways, and my belief is that what’s required is a full court press which requires that ALL ways of reporting be employed. I don’t believe that taking yourself out of any part of the game is a way to win the game.

My bottom line: The briefings have become a de facto part of democracy; reporters’ questions inform the WH that we’re not sleepwalking through this and that we’re watching every move they make as is our right. Giving up on the briefings is a sign of fear and sends the wrong message.


#20

As Masha said two years ago: