Home | About | Donate

For Meet the Press, Bernie Sanders Is He Who Must Not Be Named


#1

For Meet the Press, Bernie Sanders Is He Who Must Not Be Named

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)

Meet the Press host Chuck Todd can’t seem to get enough of the 2016 presidential race. Yet the one major candidate who announced he was running last week–Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who declared on April 30 he was running for the Democratic nomination–was strikingly ignored on Meet the Press‘s May 2 broadcast.


#2

Tangential to this is an interesting observation by James Kwak of Baseline Scenario:

"I’ve written several times about what I call the Economics 101 ideology: the overuse of a few simplified concepts from an introductory course to make sweeping policy recommendations (while branding any opponents as ignorant simpletons). The most common way that first-year economics is misused in the public sphere is ignoring assumptions. For example, most arguments for financial deregulation are ultimately based on the idea that transactions between rational actors with perfect information are always good for both sides — and most of the people making those arguments have forgotten that people are not rational and do not have perfect information. (...)"

https://medium.com/bull-market/greg-mankiw-forgot-what-he-teaches-2cf269b3aa74


#3

"And the main guest on ABC‘s This Week? Sen. Bernie Sanders, discussing the announcement of his candidacy for the Democratic nomination."

And surprisingly to me it was a fair and honest interview.
Kudos to ABC.
Perhaps they are the first MSM network to realize that people are becoming increasingly sophisticated about news coverage (thanks mainly to the internet), and if a network blatantly propagandizes, by commission or omission, in the future it will find itself at the tail end of ratings.


#4

Chuck Todd will do what he is told. Everyone knows this, especially Chuck Todd. This is the most important rule for "getting ahead" in this brave new world. Just ask Dennis Kucinich.

Ignorance, dressed up in fluff, and parading as serious media.


#6

Right on, Endgame!

Especially #4.


#7

Meet the Press has been a proponent of the military industrial complex since Tim Russert and his merry round table of Bush-Cheney paid, former American military generals to spin the horrors of war. Tom Brokhaw, the short lived host who snickered on air over the possibility of a 9-11conspiracy, took the show into the realm of the right wing Fox. Todd is one of those people who isn't very intelligent, but very good at taking orders from the higher ups. Frankly, the Sunday pseudo "news" shows are the pinnacle of American propaganda venues.


#8

This tells us something important and positive, IMO. The MSM ignore people whom they consider viable threats to elite power. Otherwise they treat them as objects of scorn and derision. They must fear Bernie as a candidate who could get traction, and is not an "insider" (as defined by Larry Summers), and therefore not beholden to corporate and black ops' agendas.

All the more reason to support Sanders in '16.


#9

Bernie is up for the challenge that the MSM has in store for him. He was well aware of the ownership of the major networks and to whom they are beholden. Fortunately, so far, with only two major players, when they have the debates they will not be able to tuck him at the far end of the lineup behind the curtain like they did with Dennis K.


#10

The forum ding-dongs who stay ON MESSAGE in blaming voters for who they vote for, added to the genius who constantly demands that a hero emerge with sufficient charisma to sway voters need to read this article. It explains how those in power render invisible any candidates that might threaten the existing status quo. THAT is what it comes down to. They have the POWER to keep these individuals OUT of the public's view.

Just as the popular candy, M & M's began to dye the same chocolate product different colors... the controllers now offer up a few females and a few candidates of color, but they are all full of the same faux filling... and deferential to, as the late Molly Ivins put it, "those that brought 'em." In other words, only packaging is allowed to alter: not content that serves the MIC, big banks, big pharma, big energy, and other corporate hegemonic hustlers.

Mr. Sanders may not threaten ALL of the entities that are harming human (and the natural world's) existence, but he sure as shit takes careful aim at some. And that counts. And that's WHY he's not being given any visibility, or through it, spreading viability... as a candidate.

This is the same protocol that had ONLY pro-war maniacal generals on-air in the uptick for war; and never allowed for open discussions about a genuine health care reform that allotted access to all citizens. It's why global warming was NEVER mentioned on The Weather Channel or most news broadcasts until relatively recently.

Control of media by corporate predators has consequences.


#11

Too bad you had to do a hit on Kucinich. Like others who blame just about ANYONE with any Left of center sensibilities or demonstrated acts & efforts,...you all leave out mention of the real horrors and hustlers:

ALEC
Fox News
The Koch Brothers
Pete Petersen
Sheldon Adelson
Paul Ryan
Scott Walker
Rick Scott
Rush Limbaugh
Frank Lutz
Bill O'Reilly

And the WAR machine.

As if it's so much more important to aim your character assassin bullets at those who did their best--like David standing up to Goliath--within a thoroughly bought and sold-out corrupt system.

Shame!

I think it's a tactical attack on the Left: this constant blame ascribed to those who stand up to today's horrors... and hold THEM accountable for what they do not yet have the power to shift. Conveniently, this leaves those actually engineering, financing, and orchestrating the myriad injustices off the hook.
"
How different is this stance from that of racist police departments having "PR jobs" done that take the heat off their homicidal mania by redirecting it towards the alleged "sins" and past records of the unfortunate human sacrifices made in order to enforce public obedience to unjust creeds?

How different is this from the tactic used by zealous defense attorneys in seeing rapists exonerated because their victims had prior sexual partners or were out alone at night?


#12

Folks, we have not seen anything yet and this latest salvo by Meet The Press is just the tip of the marginalization and demonization of the MSM, presstituted, iceberg. One wonders if during the debates Bernie will be put in a corner and be like a potted plant!


#14

We have plenty of buffoons and bloviators on CD. But celebrities? I think not. People trying to be big fish in a very small pond is more like it.


#18

I admit that what I typed could have been misconstrued. Once again I was relying on the historical awareness of those on this forum to understand the intent. I do not blame Kucinich for what happened to him, and was alluding to his exclusion by the media when he attempted to run. I always supported Kucinich and was sad to see the most outspoken elected US representative for peace gerrymandered out of his office.

Once again you have fired your salvos very wide of the mark. Give it a break dear. You are so petty and vain.


#19

For Bernie to remain visible, Democratic primary voters will have to possess the ability to see through what is obviously coming: some sort of scheme to discredit him. Since they probably won't be able to find anything scandalous, they may resort to the kind of doctored video that sank Howard Dean. He was doing fine and then the media crew took a kind of victory whoop he did, amplified it and looped it over and over until the impression was created that he was kind of a nut. In fact, amid the cheering on that occasion, the audience apparently didn't even notice anything strange about the whoop. Given Bernie's tendency to shout when he gets riled about an issue, the likely target would be a video snippet that could be altered and replayed to make him look like an angry old man. Since Bernie is far more of a threat than Dean, the media crew may feel the need to try such a trick well before any primaries. The question is: will Democratic progressives fall for it as easily as they fell for the Dean job?


#20

Post removed and placed adjacent to post for which the reply was intended.


#21

A refreshingly candid appraisal, Matt.

I've never understood how a political movement could be built from the top down by running symbolic Presidential candidates. Even in the unlikely event that such a candidate were to win, there would be no support for his or her programs in Congress.

Building a party from the ground up seems to me to be a much more sensible approach. If the Green Party captured some seats in state legislatures, it would be the first step toward developing a base that might actually threaten the entrenched duopoly.

In any event, labels don't really interest me. I vote for people not parties.

I'm supporting Sanders not because he might run as a Democrat, or a so-called socialist, or even a potential Green but because his views on the issues most closely align with my own.


#22

The slant by Meet the Press moderators has been noticeable for quite a while. In between commercials for major corporations, they field softball questions and never react to answers that are blatant lies. It is literally possible to go on the internet and, in minutes, find video that refutes the lies. No matter how ridiculous a statement by a guest is, it seems to be accepted as truthful and honest. You'll never find Meet the Press debating with a guest.