(09-01-2018 03:29 PM)Saweeep Wrote: (09-01-2018 07:45 AM)TravelerKai Wrote: (09-01-2018 05:45 AM)Saweeep Wrote: Almost every UK media source is reporting today that Trump's approval ratings are the lowest ever ever ever ever ever or something.
What's this co-ordinated attack about then fellas?
And why over here?
Quote:Trump disapproval at 60 percent in new ABC News/WaPo poll
Does that answer your question?
That poll was one of the worst ones during the election. Wildly inaccurate. Very heavy liberal sampling. This poll also said that 11% of the US wants Jeff Sessions fired and the rest want him to allow the Russia investigation to finish. 80%? Come on.
Fake as fuck news bruv.
I understand all that mate.
What I'm wondering is why the entire British media felt it was headline worthy?
Seemed a bit weird....even if it was true.
The British media used to have some right-wing influence, but no more.
Over at Breitbart, my friend - former Telegraph columnist James Delingpole - did and interview with an author of a series of critical books on UK education, on Brexit, on bad Tory PMs like. David Craig is actually a retired management consultant who writes "for fun," he says. And Craig's new book on the rapid decline of UK university education gained no reviews in the mass media whatever. (You can listen to Craig's interview at Breitbart-London at Dellingpole's interview LINK on the lower right-hand of the page.)
In the second half of the interview, Craig and Dellers commiserate on the fact that there's now only one accepted public narrative: the PC Neo-Marxist one that valorizes whatever victim group Du Jour is in favor in our New Owellian World Order that day. Contrary-wise, the New Good-Think requires the persecution of Bad-Think. And since Trump is one of those powerful Bad-thinkers, questioning - if not challenging - the New Benediction, Trump must be bashed!
They also commiserate on how London newspapers once offered lively debate of issues and genuine critical thinking not many years ago. No longer! For example, the pro-Brexit daily "The Express" got sold to a leftist media conglomerate by it's wealthy Right-leaning owner and has degenerated into uncontroversial conformity like the rest.
Furthermore, the Euro-press in general only know about the view of the US from New York and Washington, DC, and therefore only reflect the same Leftist views. They really don't know what the rest of the US - deplorable or not - think.
An active blogger ("neoneocon" and now the "newneo.com" or something at newly revised blog platform) and sometimes writer at the Weekly Standard, Jean Kaufman, was in Italy (Tuscany and Rome) for a family function this August. She says the cabby in Rome asked her what she thought about Trump?
She dodged the question by saying that greater men than Trump have sat in his cab before her. It was a sorry-assed response (which her readers did not hold her to account for). Kaufman voted against Hiilary, and thus was quite reluctant to support Trump. But she's honestly been pleasantly surprised by the President's strong and effective performance since the election.
If I were Kaufman, I would have said that if you don't watch his rally speeches, one does not know Trump. People who have known him in person for some time, like Sebastian Gorka who was in the White House, say that that's how he is in person - completely transparent. Second, I would have said that the People voted for real change; and that's why the ruling class hates Trump! Therefore, the media simply echo the Ruling Class. And if one relies on them, that's seriously misleading.
Italy has had it's own rebellious and ongoing struggle against the EU-loving ruling class! Their government has changed only months ago because off it. The response that I would have offered is much more effective at cutting through all the propaganda, smears, and lies about Trump, and explains real-world matters clearly to a stranger.
It was a sadly missed opportunity to enlighten an Italian.
Now, to your initial question:
"What's this co-ordinated attack?"
I don't know but it could well be. (SEE new my post on the Soros thread for the Media Matter's coordinated de-platforming of the Right since January, 2017.) Or it could just be how the Left media in Europe only reflects the US Left-media.
Back in the Obama years, there was a coordinated and secret list fo journalists, influential authors and academics. It was so obvious that Andrew Breitbart - the founder of Breitbart online - offered a heft reward for the lists release!
It ultimately came out as "Journalist" scandal of 200 such coordinated media-mavens who organized to defend Obama and radical Leftist Obamunism. After that was exposed as a cabal, it broke up but obviously reformed! (Breitbart died from a heart attack, and no offered another reward.) Thus, the "Son-of-Journalist" meme was born.
And since Hillary lose, either "Son-of" continues or was re-doubled by the Apparatchiks, undoubtedly to coordinate a "United Front" as the Marxists used to call it.
You can find a history of "Journolist" scandal at Conservapedia (which retains old Wiki pieces on controversial topics, before Wikipedia defaced and distorted their one-time fairly reliable reference articles).
Victor Davis Hanson chronicled how debased, dangerous and silly the so-called media first became with the inauguration of Trump in January, 2017:
Quote:In just his first month in office, reporters have already peddled dozens of fake news stories designed to discredit the President—to such a degree that little they now write or say can be taken at face value.
No, Trump did not have any plans to invade Mexico, as Buzzfeed and the Associated Press alleged.
No, Trump’s father did not run for Mayor of New York by peddling racist television ads, as reported by Sidney Blumenthal.
No, there were not mass resignations at the State Department in protest of its new leaders, as was reported by the Washington Post.
No, Trump’s attorney did not cut a deal with the Russians in Prague. Nor did Trump indulge in sexual escapades in Moscow. Buzzfeed again peddled those fake news stories.
No, a supposedly racist Trump did not remove the bust of Martin Luther King Jr. from the White House, as a Time Magazine reporter claimed.
No, election results in three states were not altered by hackers or computer criminals to give Trump the election, as implied by New York Magazine....
[T]he election in 2008 of Barack Obama marked a watershed, when a traditionally liberal media abandoned prior pretenses of objectivity and actively promoted the candidacy and presidency of their preferred candidate. The media practically pronounced him god, the smartest man ever to enter the presidency, and capable of creating electric sensations down the legs of reporters. The supposedly hard-hitting press corps asked Obama questions such as, “During these first 100 days, what has …enchanted you the most from serving in this office? Humbled you the most…?”
Obama, as the first African-American president—along with his progressive politics that were to the left of traditional Democratic policies, enraptured reporters who felt disinterested coverage might endanger what otherwise was a rare and perhaps not-to-be-repeated moment.
We are now in a media arena where there are no rules. The New York Times is no longer any more credible than talk radio; CNN—whose reporters have compared Trump to Hitler and gleefully joked about his plane crashing—should be no more believed than a blogger’s website. Buzzfeed has become like the National Inquirer.
SOURCE quoted from Hoover.org at Powerlineblog.com in "The Wages of Fake News" by John Hinderaker:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2...e-news.php
And now London newspapers and the BBC are scarcely better on Trump than the US media -
quell surprise?