“As President Trump Approaches The End Of His First 100 Days In Office, He Has Received By Far The Most Hostile Press Treatment Of Any Incoming, American President—The Broadcast Networks Punishing Him With Coverage That Has Been 89-Percent Negative.”

[Cartoon: courtesy of NetRightDaily.com]
Share on Facebook380Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Google+0

While President Trump has accomplished much within his initial 100 days, mainstream media has mired him in negativity, political dirt that never held up or simply dismissed a lot of Team Trump’s progress—e.g., job growth and anti-terrorism tactics. They’ve instead implemented their bias narratives in an effort to instigate unnecessary drama—actions more indicative of an adversarial, political party.

[President Trump at a press conference in the East Room of the White House. | Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP]
Speaking of President Trump’s pro-US jobs effort, the press gave a petty 18 minutes of visibility to Team Trump—not even a whole percent focusing on the matter. More, they allotted under-10 minutes…for Trump’s actions to revise a multitude of international-trade parameters.

On the flip side, mainstream media portrayed President Obama’s introductory period in the best light possible—infinitely many articles and live spots elaborating on the Obama outfit’s plan in terms of economics.

In a research study entailing ABC, CBS and NBC’s Team Trump-centric news, analysts compiled said information between January 20th and April 9th—plus weekends. During the initial, 80 days, visibility was heavy. Mainstream media availed 869 pieces on Team Trump (737 full reports and 132 segmented anchor-narrated spots). Another 140 features entailed different subject matter but touched on Team Trump.

There were five, main subjects representing an estimated two-fifths (43 percent) of merely 1,900 minutes dedicated to Team Trump. Please note said subjects also represented an even greater amount (63 percent) of anti-Trump content fired at his team—the aforementioned entities blanketed relevant material with hatred—over 90 percent of it.

[MRC Analytics]

“Methodology: our measure of spin was designed to isolate the networks’ own slant—not the back-and-forth of partisan politics. Thus, our analysts ignored soundbites, which merely showcased the traditional party line (Republicans supporting Trump, Democrats criticizing him) and instead tallied evaluative statements [that] imparted a clear, positive or negative tone to the story—such as statements from experts presented as non-partisan, voters or opinionated statements from the networks’ own reporters.

Using these criteria, MRC analysts tallied 1,687 evaluative statements about the Trump administration, of which 1,501 (89 percent) were negative VS a mere 186 (11 percent) which were positive.”

Mainstream media allotted 223 minutes for the conflict surrounding President Trump’s executive orders implementing the temporary ban of immigrants native to six nations plagued by Islamic terrorists. The aforementioned, news entities fluffed their segments with out-of-context commentary from people offended by the ban. “I feel ashamed to be living in this country now,” a traveler said while being featured on CBS’s January-28 segment. For ABC Weekend Anchor Cecilia Vega, President Trump’s decree availed “chaos, confusion and fear.”

A Pennsylvania-based Syrian told NBC “It feels like a nightmare”—the order caused trouble for his family, who were on their way to visit. Regardless, the argument was ultimately slanted against the ban. MRC analysts totaled 287 anti-ban comments compared to 21 pro-ban comments—a calculated 93-percent-negative slant.

Following that debacle is the Trump-Russia saga, which stemmed from both Team Trump’s and the Soviets’ suspected involvement with Democratic e-mails—222 minutes of visibility. This matter incited nearly half the comments the travel-ban issue did, but an incredible 97-percent (153 of 157 comments) were against Team Trump.

Then there’s the Republican Party’s mission to repeal Obamacare—152 minutes of visibility (night broadcasts). That issue got an unbelievable 94-percent-hated slant (193 negative VS 12 positive comments). Team Trump’s ongoing actions to manage illegal aliens (higher deportations, shut down sanctuary cities, the border-wall project) had even less visibility—120 minutes. Of said time, 93 percent of it was painted negatively (117 negative VS nine positive comments).

Recall President Trump accusing Obama of having “wiretapped” Trump Tower—only 97 minutes of visibility there. Of those minutes, 99.5 percent were against Trump—189 negative comments VS one soundbite on ABC’s World News Tonight (a March-5th segment featuring an audio file of a man at a pro-Trump gathering. “I think there’ some validity in Mr. Trump’s comments.”).

Mainstream-media anchors utilized the cannon fodder to shoot down President Trump and smash him with the dishonesty stick. “After a string of unproven claims, will this President struggle to keep the trust of the American public?” NBC’s Lester Holt inquisitively stated on March 20th.

Don’t forget about CBS’s March-eighth segment with Scott Pelley alluding to President Trump struggling with mental disorders. To Democratic Official Leon Panetta, Pelley asked, “Is it appropriate to ask whether the President is having difficulty with rationality?”

[Scott Pelley’s conversation with Leon Panetta | Source: CBS via MRC]
All other subjects (obviously more engaging to Trump followers) were low-tier topics for mainstream media. Take US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s lengthy journey to his current position—69 minutes of visibility from the news entities. Even more unfortunate is the ISIS ordeal (e.g., the secret attack on Yemen, which caused the death of a Navy SEAL)—only 57 minutes of visibility.

However, for the Obama outfit, their initial days were comparable to a cake walk. Mainstream media was hyping Obama’s crucial points—plus the $1 trillion “stimulus” package (150 news pieces or 15 percent of total). Mainstream media’s slant on the Obama outfit’s effort: 58 percent favorable VS 42 percent unfavorable.

During that period, analysts deduced that mainstream media pushed positive visibility for Obama’s management of the housing market (59 percent favorable). When he opted for tax dollars to cover stem-cell research, which actually is a detriment to embryos, mainstream media had him in an 82-percent-favorable light. Obama’s global-warming-prevention effort (78 percent favorable).

“The President’s first seven weeks have been a whirlwind, with often dramatic movement in all directions, on all fronts: the economy, health care, two wars and today education reform,” NBC Nightly News then-Anchor Brian Williams proudly said on the March 10, 2009.

What about ABC’s World News Medical Editor Dr. Tim Johnson boasting about the March 2009 health-care conference? “I was blown away by President Obama’s grasp of the subject, how he connected the dots, how he answered the questions without any script.”

[ABC World News former-Medical Editor Dr. Tim Johnson]
There was also the multitude of mainstream-media features celebrating The Obama Family as if they were pop-culture icons. “From the moment the Obamas landed in Britain, hand in hand, many here were already star-struck,” NBC Nightly News Dawna Friesen exclaimed back in April 2009. In the same month that year, ABC’s David Muir corresponded from a European Leaders Summit and described Obama as “the cool kid in the class.”

Currently, there are no warm, fuzzy extras for Team Trump. Mainstream media prefers to convey Trump-centric people and things as evil while being unrelentingly hateful with their visibility of Team Trump’s mission and Trump himself.

So long as a president advocates mainstream media’s liberal philosophies, reporters will gladly cheer them on, throwing figurative confetti at the White House. God forbid a conservative win the presidency—darkness falls upon that leader. Reporters mutate into winged demons who swoop in and shred apart that person and their efforts.

Comments

Share on Facebook380Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Google+0