I only knew about this one because of John Oliver’s piece on it (he’s pretty mean to the antipodes)
1 Like
John Oliver’s a ■■■■■■■ riot, his interview with Snowden was excellent. If mainstream media was more like him and less about political agenda, I’d watch the news every night.
It’s seriously good investigative journalism, I also wish the more of the media was prepared to undertake it. I think a lot of the issue is the form news is presented in too - 24 hour news channels seem to have less and less content, just headlines. Spouting alerts isn’t enough, to do news properly you have to digest it and drill down into issues in a well-researched, open-minded way. Most news channels don’t have the space for it.
There are some people who have morally indefensible jobs, yet those jobs must be so trying I still feel a great deal of pity and warmth towards them. Blake with Handsome Jack. Whoever cleans adult film sets. And I feel kind of the same way for Donald Trump’s campaign manager.
2 Likes
I’m not sure if I can find sympathy for Conway or not, I mean she has to put up with a lot, but on the other hand given what she’s doing and has done… Now Ryan? Ryan I can sympathize with.
I’m not the only one who rolled my eyes when the media circus came to town on this one am I? How many decades did that woman wait before throwing out this accusation? Perhaps it really did happen, but what convenient timing to bring it up right around election time. Like the US hasn’t had immoral presidents anyway, his opponent is the wife of one.
Hypothetically let’s say that it is true, Trump sexually harassed some woman, grabbed her by the ■■■■■ or whatever she says he did (as I said, I try to avoid mainstream media). How much does that actually affect his political campaign? Considering the outrageous things he’s said already, is that even the worst thing about this man? It just seems like a smear campaign to me, but I’m interested to know how many people here find merit in the accusations and who thinks it’s even relevant to the here and now.
It’s a meme.
I’m not here to debate you or anyone. Sorry.
Smarter than parrots too, which people like to credit with intelligence. They can also speak better than parrots as well if trained to speak. I hear you can also train politicians to speak as well.
3 Likes
[quote=“Slif_One, post:288, topic:1199216, full:true”]
I’m not the only one who rolled my eyes when the media circus came to town on this one am I? How many decades did that woman wait before throwing out this accusation? [/quote]
Well, you see, there’s the one that had the pending litigation that was only resolved by the start of the year in an out of court settlement. Then there’s the other 8 or so that came out around the same time. We’ll talk about that more in a minute though.
[quote]
Perhaps it really did happen, but what convenient timing to bring it up right around election time.[/quote]
Personally, if I was sexually assaulted an the person who did it had a solid chance to become the leader of the free world, I’d probably feel like bringing it up at that point. Now as to how and why they did it, it was probably more closely tied to the Billy Bush tape that got released where he was bragging about doing… exactly the things that all these women say that he did. There’s this weird thing that people have about sexual assault where they get the nagging feeling that if they come out and just say it, that no one will believe them. The fact that that shook a lot of them into coming out isn’t super surprising, as we’ve seen it happen before. Look at the cosby case where everything got unfurled out of one joke that a comedian whipped out, and then that resulted in like a billion women coming forward. It’s a thing.
[quote]
Like the US hasn’t had immoral presidents anyway, his opponent is the wife of one.[/quote]
Look, I’m not here to defend Bill Clinton. Adultery sucks. But comparing Adultery between two (or in bills case, like 2-3) consenting adults and actual, factual sexual assault is like… well there’s not even a metaphor there. One is immoral and ■■■■■■, the other is out and out evil.
[quote]
Hypothetically let’s say that it is true, Trump sexually harassed some woman, grabbed her by the ■■■■■ or whatever she says he did (as I said, I try to avoid mainstream media). [/quote]
This is a pretty easy hypothetical as Trump has in one case presented one eyewitness who was on a plane who said “he didn’t see anything”, wheras in the same case the woman has six eyewitnesses that say that the event did indeed happen. Personally, I’m there already.
I’m assuming what you mean to say here is “affect his ability to be president” rather than his campaign, because the blowback to the campaign is pretty obvious, given the big shift in the polls lately. Women make up the largest voting demographic in the US, so even if these were just off the wall statements he made because he’s a sad little ■■■■, then its going to affect the campaign.
How it affects his ability to be president is well…
[quote]
Considering the outrageous things he’s said already, is that even the worst thing about this man?[/quote]
Its rare that sexual assault isn’t the worst thing a person can be accused of, but in trumps case it may be true. We’ve all seen him promote violence, go off on pseudo-racist tangents and well, literally everything else that he’s said come out of his mouth. So it makes me feel very icky to say “it’s debatable”. I will say it certainly helps bring to light how far a candidate can make it in this day and age before he pisses off a big enough demographic to actually make a shift.
As stated above, women make up the single largest voting block in the US. Even if all of what was stated on that tape was hyperbole, it shows the level of “respect, the biggest respect for women” that the man really has. Now you can make the argument that we’ve had politicians in office that are ■■■■■■ for women before - this is true. What is also true is that there are still a lot of ■■■■■■ things happening for women right now. If part of your political agenda involves ending those ■■■■■■ things, then you could absolutely discredit all the accusers, and then still have this be a big issue to you if you were an undecided voter.
With the accusers coming forward, that adds a special level of darkness to it, because he very well may have been exactly honest. I personally think he absolutely was.
Given, I thought he was a giant piece of ■■■■ before hand, but now that piece of ■■■■ smells a lot worse.
Sorry if that seems ranty, its just one of the aforementioned things I see on my bookface that I don’t really get to respond to.
4 Likes
There are some problems in reacting with eye-rolling to accusations of sexual assault. For a start, public acceptance and even welcoming discussion of the experience of sexual assault is a very recent, and still extremely partial, benefit for its victims. It’s inevitable that if you speak out with this kind of claim you will be mocked and subjected to scepticism. This was a lot worse decades ago, and it’s still a problem. Had I experienced sexual assault, even if I thought the perpetrator should be seen for what they are, I would be very wary about publicly declaring it. [quote=“Slif_One, post:288, topic:1199216”]
Perhaps it really did happen, but what convenient timing to bring it up right around election time.
[/quote]
It’s worth distinguishing between ‘election time’ and the time after it was publicly revealed that Trump bragged about grabbing women ‘by the ■■■■■’ and claimed it was all talk. The timing actually suggests it was the latter which caused these women to come forward. It’s also impossible for victims of assault to know that they are part of a wider pattern of behaviour. These women may well have assumed it was an isolated incident before hearing Trump speak about what he supposedly does to women and hearing the experiences of others.
Media attention might tempt people to lie about being sexually assaulted (though the evidence is that an overwhelming percentage of women who make accusations are telling the truth) but it can also prompt people who just tried to forget what happened to come forward, particularly when they see that they’re not alone.[quote=“Slif_One, post:288, topic:1199216”]
Hypothetically let’s say that it is true, Trump sexually harassed some woman, grabbed her by the ■■■■■ or whatever she says he did (as I said, I try to avoid mainstream media). How much does that actually affect his political campaign?
[/quote]
Trump has said a lot of potentially harmful things in this election, but I found his comments about women particularly troubling. Even if they were ‘just words’, they validated a culture where sexual assault is routine and often acceptable. According to US and UN surveys 1 in 5 American women are the victims of rpe or attempted rpe, and 83% of girls experience sexual harassment at school. To elect a man who actually contributed to this epidemic is disgraceful.
4 Likes
Well looks like I have plenty to catch up on in line.
Early voting opened here in Texas today, my local station currently has an hour wait.
Vote early, vote often!
As a democrat, I assure you I shall be doing the latter this cycle
I’m having fun trying to pick out Trump and Clinton voters in line. Judging strangers is awesome
1 Like
What are the tells?
The key word there, investigative, is the issue. Most of our news networks cut those departments because they were more costly, and instead just got talking heads.
Also lower ratings.
The way the industry piggybacks it becomes very easy to cut your investigative budget and just assume “someone else will do it and then we’ll link to them with our own spin”.
sigh
As an example, there’s a middle aged white guy with wrap-around shades on the back of his head and a scowl etched on his face.
Trumpster fo sho
A girl whose hair features pink stripes and shaved sides
Guessing Bernie voting Clinton out of resignation
I try not to be prejudiced in all honestly, but given where I live it’s hard not to be presumptuous of certain types
1 Like
Yes! ‘Debate’ by talking heads is not the same as in-depth, open minded research. Of course it’s more than likely that when you undertake any sustained investigation you will have pre-existing prejudices and opinions. But that doesn’t mean you can’t try to set them aside and carry out a sustained examination of the facts, chasing up leads and details to find out what’s actually going on. That’s good journalism. And John Oliver’s show is superb at it.
I also really like the humour it chooses to present. It’s very kind. It does mock celebrities, but in general it’s just empathic and warm. It contributes to the whole show’s lack of cynicism.
I remember when the Anthony Weiner scandal first came up CNN showed the picture and asked the question if its real or not and said something like “I guess we can’t find out unless he tells us” I just kept thinking, no you could do your ■■■■■■■ job and investigate it!!! Kids on reddit were doing it, I would think professional journalist could.