The NY Times released several articles and tweets, and even a letter from its publisher and executive editor, pledging to “report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor”. Given the fact that profit and revenue continue to decline at the paper, prompting yet another round of layoffs, the NY Times at least gave the outward appearance of accepting the new reality of news. The internet has given birth to a slew of alternative media outlets that are able to easily expose errors and bias in MSM reporting, and their rise has directly contributed to the decline of MSM outlets and their ad revenues. In the wake of Trump’s win, it almost felt as if Mainstream Media recognized that it needed to change to survive.
Well… almost. The big television outlets continue to get the majority of viewers, which brings them the majority of big name interviews. And they are showing absolutely no signs of abandoning their biased reporting, instead continuing to demonstrate the same hubris that is leading to the decline of traditional print newspapers and their online outlets. Nowhere was that more evident than last night’s 60 Minutes interview of Trump.
Obviously, Trump took the interview with 60 Minutes to demonstrate his conciliatory tone, and show that he is going to try to work with both parties to implement his agenda. Regardless, both 60 Minutes interviewer Lesley Stahl and Trump himself noted that his majority in the house/senate could make the need for compromise unnecessary.
Lesley Stahl: And you’ve got both Houses?
Donald Trump: And I have both Houses and we have the presidency, so we can do things–
Lesley Stahl: You can do things lickety-split.
Donald Trump: It’s been a long time since it’s happened.
Stahl continued to launch a number of difficult questions at Trump, including: his decision to hire a number of DC insiders for his staff, how he would handle Supreme Court appointments and whether or not he would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, and how he would implement his campaign pledges to combat illegal immigration. However, her anti-Trump bias was at its peak when she asked about anti-Trump protests, focusing on Trump supporters harassing minorities.
It has been five full days since the election and anti-Trump demonstrations, driven in part by Hillary Clinton’s edge in the popular vote, have been significant.
When we interviewed him on Friday afternoon Mr. Trump said he had not heard about some of the acts of violence that are popping up in his name… or against his supporters.
Nor he said had he heard about reports of racial slurs and personal threats against African Americans, Latinos and gays by some of his supporters.
Donald Trump: I am very surprised to hear that– I hate to hear that, I mean I hate to hear that–
Lesley Stahl: But you do hear it?
Donald Trump: I don’t hear it—I saw, I saw one or two instances…
Lesley Stahl: On social media?
Lesley Stahl: Do you want to say anything to those people?
Donald Trump: I would say don’t do it, that’s terrible, ‘cause I’m gonna bring this country together.
Lesley Stahl: They’re harassing Latinos, Muslims–
Donald Trump: I am so saddened to hear that. And I say, “Stop it.” If it– if it helps. I will say this, and I will say right to the cameras: Stop it.
If you watch the interview, you’ll see that Stahl makes only a passing mention at Trump supporters being harassed, though she presses Trump on his supporters harassing minorities. Stahl ignores the fact that if you look at any unbiased coverage…
…the vast majority of the violence has come from the anti-Trump movement, and as protests continue nationwide, the chants of “not my President” and the violence against Trump voters continues, with very little coming out of the anti-Trump camp. Even a lot of the violence by Trump supporters is of questionable credibility, as paid protesters are working both angles, to not only get out the anti-Trump protests, but to paint Trump supporters as violent, when they are more often than not peaceful and docile.
You really don’t think they’re paid? Think again.
Meanwhile, liberal outlets are taking a much softer tone with those who are in their own party. On Friday, Eric Holder was a guest on Real Time with Bill Maher. The list of “difficult” questions you could ask this guy is almost endless. From his crucial role in vetting and approving the pardon of Marc Rich, to his well-paid subsequent employment at Covington and Burling, his tenure as Attorney General which is littered with scandal after scandal, to his return to his well-paying job at Covington… if it was my interview, I wouldn’t know where to start. So, what does Maher do? He didn’t ask one difficult question, and instead turned the interview into a sobfest about abolishing the electoral college, noting that it would make elections “fair”, as Hillary “won” the popular vote.
— Bill Maher (@billmaher) November 12, 2016
They also spent time mocking Chris Christie, and claimed Russia and the FBI meddled in the election, stating that they worked together in “weaponizing the American media”. Nowhere in there was there any question that was critical of Holder, or even a suggestion that Trump’s win was a result of people who are tired of the “revolving door” in Washington, of which Holder is a prime example of. Mediaite has the whole interview on their site, and I highly recommend giving it a watch, so you can see firsthand how pathetically soft and one-sided Maher’s interview was.
Perhaps one day, their ratings and profits will slide far enough that they will have no choice but to ask tough questions of their big name liberal guests. However, even the supposed “tolerant” college campuses are exiling Trump voters from their campuses. It looks like we have a lot more “cry-in” protests left before the liberal media starts asking tough questions of themselves.
What’s more likely though, is that they will never ask tough questions of anyone but themselves. After all, they are continuing to bury their heads in the sand and be oblivious to their own lack of control over the news cycle. Don’t expect them to make a turn out of obsolescence anytime soon.