| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Why those in media bubble never got Trump’s rise – and still don’t
Here is a good summary piece on how out of touch the establishment media is. What Kurtz leaves out is the ever more obvious fact that many in the media are not just clueless because they’re caught in their little social bubbles, but actively malevolent — paid by Soros (see evidence here, here, and here) to help destroy Trump’s effort to make America great again.
“Why those in media bubble never got Trump’s rise – and still don’t,” by Howard Kurtz, Fox News, March 13, 2017:
This just in: There really is a liberal media elite that dwell in an isolated bubble.
And that, in turn, causes a disconnect from reality, as we saw during the 2016 campaign and which continues during the opening weeks of the Trump presidency.
Now data guru Nate Silver, who stumbled last year, has copped to the media’s tendency toward groupthink.
Silver hits on many of the themes that I’ve been talking about for a long time, and which many conservatives instinctively believe without wielding his number-crunching skills.
He now says on 538 that journalists have a hard time coping with something that is unthinkable, which is how most in the media biz viewed Donald Trump’s election. That was equally true during the primaries, as I remember from endless on-air debates in which I insisted the billionaire had a good shot, only to be told he would implode the next day, the next week, the next month.
If you immerse yourself in the mainstream coverage now, it often seems the administration is on the verge of collapse. But we learned on Friday that the economy created 235,000 jobs in February—“beating expectations,” in Wall Street lingo. Trump may or may not deserve credit for the drop to 4.7 unemployment, but the stock market surge does reflect growing economic optimism, and that matters more to many voters than who met with which Russian envoy.
Remember when the New York Times every day would say that Hillary Clinton had a 92 percent, or 91 percent, or 95 percent chance of winning? And there would be stories about her pushing into red states to aim for a landslide? It wasn’t that long ago.
Let’s go to Silver’s data: “For starters, American newsrooms are not very diverse along racial or gender lines, and it’s not clear the situation is improving much. And in a country where educational attainment is an increasingly important predictor of cultural and political behavior, some 92 percent of journalists have college degrees.”
So people trying to get by in this economy with a high school education are culturally alien.
“As of 2013, only 7 percent of them identified as Republicans (although only 28 percent called themselves Democrats with the majority saying they were independents).” No shocker there.
“The political news industry has become increasingly consolidated in Washington and New York as local newspapers have suffered from a decade-long contraction.” And fewer reporters head into flyover country to talk to actual voters….
Source: http://pamelageller.com/2017/03/media-trump-rise.html/
