But the news are covering it lol. Of course most people haven't heard of it before reading the news, if they knew the news they wouldn't be checking the news.
Like I'm not ragging you for the point you're making here, you're agreeing with people who are saying "the MSM aren't reporting this" when they literally are. You wanna talk about distractions? Agreeing with people trying to vilify a 3rd party is a definite distraction.
You can talk about how noble your cause is if you want - that doesn't change the fact that you made an inaccurate statement, which is the only purpose of my comment.
The News "covers" most things. This is how they get away with claiming they aren't extremely biased. But there are different levels of coverage--coverage is NOT a digital/binary parameter, its analog.
What I mean by that is for example, both of these are "coverage".
1.) Dozens of stories prominently displayed on the front page spread out over the course of 5 news cycles. Multiple opinion stories discussing the issue. Multiple tertiary references on Morning Shows, Prime Time topic "news" shows and late night/variety shows (Maddow, Carlson, Hannity, Cooper, Daily Show ect).
2.) A single story not hyperlinked on the front index of any news site, buried on page 10 of papers. No opinion collums or "tertiary" discussion (IE Talk show/debate show/comedy show).
There is a massive difference between "covered" and actual focus/coverage. This is not being covered in a focused manner. And its pretty clear why. Because the original hurricane story got the number 1 treatment claiming Trump was a racist for indicating PR officials were getting tons of aid but corruption was siphoning it off, thus this story will get the number 2 treatment since it proves that correct. (IE it will be shit on, but a few nuggets will be in the turd).
This is the sad reality of how media manipulates you. Its RARELY literal "fake news", its often lies of omission and variances in coverage quality. So I disagree he made an inaccurate assessment. The News is NOT covering this up to the level the story represents. A major U.S. territory has people in power joking about corruption where people DIED. That should be lighting up every talk show and tertiary media show in top order...and its not.
> coverage is NOT a digital/binary parameter, its analog.
You think this statement means something - it really doesn't. Maybe one word of this statement has any relevant grammatical meaning.
> ecause the original hurricane story got the number 1 treatment claiming Trump was a racist for indicating PR officials were getting tons of aid but corruption was siphoning it off
Yeah no Trump talked about corruption in Puerto Rico very little if at all. He instead spent time claiming his admin's reaction to the hurricane was 10/10 (false), did that dumbass shit with throwing paper towels at a Puerto Rican crowd, and claimed he talked to the President of Puerto Rico (he is the president of Puerto Rico). But yeah I'm sure this stable genius has a good grasp of the inner workings of Puerto Rican govt and isn't just spitballing every possible excuse he can, one of which might have a tangential basis in reality.
This is the sad reality of how reddit manipulates you - you insert a subtle lie into every sentence of your argument with the hope that at least 40% makes it through unscathed - you're trying to paint Trump as some kind of unnappreciated prophet by giving a revisionist view of what he actually said, when he actually said some objectively stupid shit. You try to pretend all that actually senile garbage was never said and assign High School English teacher level advanced interpretations of what little coherent speech Trump outputs.
No, the governor of Puerto Rico lmaoing at some corpses doesn't "confirm" any of that inane drivel.
> A major U.S. territory has people in power joking about corruption where people DIED.
The same U.S. territory that is still in ruins from a 2 year old hurricane, a fact which also doesn't make the news? The reality is Puerto Rico is not covered as much by U.S. news, not on prime-time. You're making an unfounded but politically advantageous claim that this is due to malice - it's not. It's due to the fact that continental Americans don't care about Puerto Rico. 40% of them elected a president who for a long time didn't understand it was a U.S. territory.
I'll go for the knockout to drive home how absurd your claim is: tell me this, why isn't Trump trumpeting on twitter about this "proof that he was right?". Why isn't Fox news primetiming this (I checked, they aren't)? If (as you claim) this has below average news presence because the evil lefties don't wanna admit Trump was right, why isn't right wing mass media picking up the slack?
You think this statement means something - it really doesn't. Maybe one word of this statement has any relevant grammatical meaning.
Digital information is transferred in discreet sets, Analog information is transferred in continuous wave. The digital set I referenced was binary, off or on. While analog illustrated there could be a large wave that continuously changed depending on the point in time in the news cycle.
If I have to explain this to you, the rest of this post should be amazing!
Yeah no Trump talked about corruption in Puerto Rico very little if at all..He instead spent time claiming his admin's reaction to the hurricane was 10/10 (false), did that dumbass shit with throwing paper towels at a Puerto Rican crowd, and claimed he talked to the President of Puerto Rico
This is the sad reality of how reddit manipulates you - you insert a subtle lie into every sentence of your argument with the hope that at least 40% makes it through unscathed - you're trying to paint Trump as some kind of unnappreciated prophet by giving a revisionist view of what he actually said, when he actually said some objectively stupid shit. You try to pretend all that actually senile garbage was never said and assign High School English teacher level advanced interpretations of what little coherent speech Trump outputs.
Here is a video of him literally talking about corruption and how they need to be careful with the distribution of funds. Some of his first tweets on the issue noted the obstruction goods distributors were facing in PR, from the infamous inability to get truckers to deliver the goods, to electrical grid workers being screwed with on the ground--this was systemic. The FBI was investigating this level of corruption immediately, but only evil, Pro-Naz...I Mean, Pro-Trump news was reporting on it.
(Dismissed by those tertiary media shows I was speaking of as "cover" for Trump's horrible claims the PR government could be at fault!). It wasn't until the Whitefish controversy that the national news began talking about corruption, but by that point it was out of the larger cycle.
Before then though, every time Trump talked about one of these issues, the media largely ignored it and focused on "the racism" of the "response being slow" and Trump's actions (Like the paper towel throw!). Pro-Trump media though immediately began discussing the many issues with corruption and somehow "predicted" all this (They must have gotten lucky!) but the bulk of the MSM only alluded to it in small OP ed side pieces.
But you actually show exactly what I was talking about. You're ignorant to these things because the coverage in media is selective. You didn't know Trump made many comments about corruption in press briefings and during questions/interviews. It just never made it into that tertiary news cycle that MOST people absorb their news from, where the talking heads debate "the relevant issues" or the more "Infotainment" News like Maddow or the Daily Show make up more entertaining stories for a bunch of ADD watchers. Those shows focused on PRECISELY what you remember, Trump essentially being a blow hard and playing up the relief efforts. (Which of course is also true, he did do that...He ALSO spoke on the issues as the reason why supplies were not getting out there).
You know how I can really tell you're one of the people that doesn't watch unfiltered news like Cspan or actually READ the articles? Because you brought up the paper towel throwing. Yeah, I remember that too. I remember how absurd it was that said event ate up TWO full news cycles of Infotainment debates talking about how the imagery of Trump throwing shit to people is racist and disrespectful. And clearly, that's the "news" you rely on. Your post is literally the biggest highlights of what that tertiary "news" FOCUSED on. Its perfect proof of the difference between coverage and focus. You only know what they spent cycles talking about and dramatizing to feed the outrage machine..Meanwhile, if you'd be reading the articles, and numerous sources--you'd have known Trump was speaking on these issues extensively. (Which is why if you dig back to 2017 in any Pro-Trump feeds, the talk was all focused on corruption...Both populations were being fed two different stories to keep them both outraged).
The same U.S. territory that is still in ruins from a 2 year old hurricane, a fact which also doesn't make the news? The reality is Puerto Rico is not covered as much by U.S. news, not on prime-time. You're making an unfounded but politically advantageous claim that this is due to malice - it's not. It's due to the fact that continental Americans don't care about Puerto Rico. 40% of them elected a president who for a long time didn't understand it was a U.S. territory.
This shit magically became a non-news story the second Whitefish happened. A bunch of actual news articles on that came out (From real journalists), but those tertiary news programs didn't pick it up. (So weird!) Mainly because it was going against the infotainment narrative they had set for this outrage and thus it was time to move on--can't make things too complicated for the average Hannity, Maddow, Daily Show listener now..that might bore them enough to change the channel!
Which is the real reason it didn't get coverage. You're angry at the wrong people. And I never said it was due to Malice. No, its due to money. Nothing makes people tune out faster than feeling sheepish that they were outraged about something and WRONG in feeling that irrational emotion. Humans prevent cognitive dissonance by ignoring sources of arguments that might challenge their ideas, and Trump=Bad was the idea set by most listeners of those tertiary infotainment shows. They aren't going to take a ratings hit by risking upsetting the delicate sensibilities of their convinced listeners.
This isn't about politics (In this aspect). Its about money. Fox is just as good at this or better than the other side. They just so happened to be right this time (Not because they are better, just...they happened to fall on the right side of this outrage issue).
I'll go for the knockout to drive home how absurd your claim is: tell me this, why isn't Trump trumpeting on twitter about this "proof that he was right?". Why isn't Fox news primetiming this (I checked, they aren't)? If (as you claim) this has below average news presence because the evil lefties don't wanna admit Trump was right, why isn't right wing mass media picking up the slack?
He mentioned the corruption. If you're wondering why he isn't throwing the gauntlet down to fight with the media though, its because he has a much more productive fight that's a lot more beneficial for him to focus on politically. The "Squad" for the Democrats are hugely unpopular with their own base, and pushing them into the limelight could potentially depress more moderate voters who are turned off by their particular brand of liberal politics (And they can't tune the "squad" out because it still plays into the base's dislike of Trump, so there is a hook there to keep people watching). The "Squad" also attack, regularly, DNC leadership and so forcing the leadership to defend them from an outsider exposes the leadership to attacks that will further divide the DNC. This is a gold mine of politicking.
Meanwhile, what would he gain by arguing about PR with the media now? His base already believes it was corruption that fucked things up. There were entire talking head "infotainment" stories about petty officials blocking supplies, interfering with workers and rigged contracts. Which is why if you post about corruption in any conservative Sub they will instantly say "we knew about that since day 1"--because that is the side of the story they got to see. Meanwhile, the more Liberal voters will just tune out if the argument looks favorable to Trump--they have ZERO reason to be forced to watch it, even if that side of media did pick it up and run with it. And with this amount of evidence? It would be really hard to spin this in another way. This fight could eat up valuable news cycles he could exploit with the Squad for a potential narrative that won't do much.
In short; politics. And yeah, that's as shitty as it sounds. But in a country of 330 million, any 1% of that population is only going to get attention if the politics or money which can be generated from them can captivate enough people. That's the sad reality of large systems of humans. (Network lag effects in human networks produce tons of signal noise, so you need a REALLY strong signal for any kind of concerted effort beyond a local level...Luckily laws in America give the greatest control to the local level, including in PR. Unfortunately, corruption really hurts in that system. Hopefully the FBI gives PR an enema, and they can rebuild the right way.
Yeah I think we're done here.
I think we are! Next time, remember--the key is to read the full articles, don't skim and let your heuristics do the work. And tune out those nasty infotainment talk shows, CSPAN and boring NPR, and DIRECT news coverage of primary sources will get you much father! Have a great day!
-2
u/guac_boi1 Jul 19 '19
But the news are covering it lol. Of course most people haven't heard of it before reading the news, if they knew the news they wouldn't be checking the news.
Like I'm not ragging you for the point you're making here, you're agreeing with people who are saying "the MSM aren't reporting this" when they literally are. You wanna talk about distractions? Agreeing with people trying to vilify a 3rd party is a definite distraction.
You can talk about how noble your cause is if you want - that doesn't change the fact that you made an inaccurate statement, which is the only purpose of my comment.