Neal Gabler at Consortium News — Missing the Biggest 2016 Story
To their everlasting discredit, most of the MSM Big Feet, which is what the late journalist Richard Ben Cramer labeled the self-important, pontificating political reporters and pundits who dominate our press, got it all wrong about Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
That is no small thing when you consider those two are the big stories this campaign season. It’s like a weatherman missing a Category Five hurricane. Of course, if a weatherman had blown that call, he probably would be fired. With pundits, getting it wrong never seems to matter
…
The most powerful of them – the ones you read, see and hear the most – constitute an elite so far removed that it could only understand us through the most aggressive sympathetic imagination. And that is not going to happen.For one thing, journalists as a whole don’t look like the rest of America. “The typical U.S. journalist is a 41 year-old white male,” began a 2006 report by the Pew Research Center. When that report was updated in 2013, that typical journalist had become a 47 year-old white male, and the median age had risen not only at newspapers, where one might expect journalists to be aging along with their institution, but also at TV and radio stations and even online news sites. [emp added]
Why might it be expected that the median age of journalists to increase six years in the seven years between 2006 and 2013? Are mature journalists delaying retirement at a much higher rate than in the past and therefore, there are fewer openings for young journalists? Possibly, but that wouldn’t account for such a large increase in the median age in such a short period of time.
Are younger journalists being hired at an older age than in the past? Over the past sixty years that’s undoubtedly true as J-Schools became the feeder stream for new hires. (Not coincidentially, the quality of journalism has gone down over the same period.1) But that change pre-dated the period under discussion; although it’s not unrelated.
The death spiral of jounalism is three pronged. Consolidation mania began in the 1980s, but the speed of it for jounalism increased with the 1996 Telecom Act. Local newspapers were gobbled up, staffs were cut, and fewer new hires came after that (and only those hired had the right credentials). Poorer quality meant fewer customers in an industry that had weak revenue streams to begin with. Then advertising dollars began to disappear with internet adverts and Craig’s list. More staff cuts followed by lower quality followed by more consolidations (and a few bankruptcies, spin-offs, and reorganizations along the way).
USA Today – Gannett offers $815 million to buy Tribune Publishing
…
The offer price is about 5.6 times Tribune’s estimated 2016 earnings before interest, taxes and other items (EBITDA). Gannett estimates about $50 million a year in “synergies” savings. Gannett owns USA TODAY plus 107 local news organizations including the Detroit Free Press, Cincinnati Enquirer, Des Moines Register, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Arizona Republic.
…
“We believe Tribune shares the new Gannett’s unwavering commitment to journalistic excellence and delivering superior content on all platforms,” Dickey said in a statement Monday.
…
If Gannett were to complete the deal, it would expand the NETWORK in strategic markets by owning dominant newspapers in major metro areas, such as the Los Angeles Times,the Baltimore Sun, Hartford Courant, Chicago Tribune and the Orlando Sentinel.
…
Maybe when Gannett, Murdoch, and Bezos own all the news publications, they won’t even have to give lip-service to “commitment to journalism.”
1 – Journalists such as Pete Hamill and Carl Bernstein weren’t only good at getting the facts but could write. They developed their craft on-the-job and worked with and for other good craftsman.
Good article by Steven D at caucus99percent – The Democratic Party’s Forty Percent Dilemma
For those that don’t know or have forgotten, one aspect of Watergate was about collecting and not reporting big bucks from wealthy people and that led to campaign finance reforms — 1974 Amendments to the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act which completed the public financing of Presidential elections. So, it’s not surprising that by 1980 the percentage of contributions from wealthy individuals would be low as there were primary spending caps and a large chunk of primary funds were federal dollars and general elections were public financed, except for what was supposed to be minor legal and compliance costs. Apparently many loopholes in those “minor” costs because they were significant by 2008 for McCain, the last major party nominee to accept public financing.
Hey thanks Marie.
Trying not to make the natives too restless over here.
Delayed adding the link to this thread b/c I didn’t know if you planned to post it at the Pond. Then figured since so few people bother to read my diaries that it wouldn’t hurt to provide the link to it.
You’re just riling up the pretzel brains at the Pond that have convinced themselves that trashing Bernie and his supporters using crap that likely originates out of Brock’s trolling operation constitutes a rationale for supporting HRC. Poor consumers of information that skip the critical thinking step before pontificating. Much like the only person that I ever had political arguments with that were completely frustrating and totally perplexing to me because he was smart and kind. One day I took a wild shot in the dark and said, “You need to stop listening to Rush.” Wild guess b/c I knew who Rush was but had no idea what he spewed and that his fans were called dittoheads. A bulls-eye and the man never again attempted to engage with me in political discussions after that. I mention that experience b/c it’s exactly the same as I’ve experienced here with a few commentators here who have left me with no choice but ignore them even when they jump in to trash me.
Come join Steven and me at caucus99percent. The water’s fine.
So far voting is only positive, no hide rates, no numbers, click if you agree, don’t if you don’t. Conversation is supposed to be civil and so far it is.
Don’t see any race hatred or other non-policy discussion. Don’t know how long it will last.
I made my first post, a reply regarding writing in Bernie, Jill Stein, Donald Trump. I’ll see if anyone takes my head off. Won’t be disappointed if they do. I advocated a pretty radical stance. Won’t mind spirited reaction – as long as it’s civil and reasoned.
Nice people there. I’m good just reading the posts. For a number of reasons, prefer to post at one blog and so far this one is okay; although there are more and more here that I have to ignore. They’ll settle down when they win b/c for the most part they’re “winning is everything” types.
OT, but the founding fathers were considered to have a “pretty radical stance” and that was a good thing. Most of us are happy with the foundations these guys laid out, but not happy with the current crop of politicians/lobbyists who try to circumvent the constitution. I think the little people are sick of the neoliberal/neoconservative policies and their voices not being heard due to the $$ in campaigns; frustrated with a rigged financial/political system which is reinforced by the media; and insulted by the condescension expressed by the elites in both parties. It’s been brewing for a while now. We’ve had past progressive movements in our history.
Never heard of this site but it’s interesting. I see Steven D is there along with a lot of exiles from the Great Orange Satan that I respect.
Been trying to find the public record of who owns the site but have been unsuccessful. The record probably shows a privacy front company anyway. When did it start? What are the goals? Does Kos own it and is he covering his bets? Been bitten so many times I’m more than twice shy.
It does seem more pleasant than RedState which is full of people foaming at the mouth, sort of a mirror image of DailyKos, which this site is turning into.
Kos doesn’t own it.
If interested go to the contact link:
http://caucus99percent.com/contact
and ask any questions you like of the admins.
The site was created over year before the GOS turned into Hillary Central.
Thanks!
I’m registered over there.
More ignorant than those that suggest a Clinton/Cuomo or Trump/Guiliani ticket. Of course Clinton claims several states as “home” and perhaps her DC townhouse could count as her current residence to get around that pesky Constitutional requirement. And Trump does have a yuuge house in FL. So, either of those tickets might pass as easily as the GWB/Cheney ticket did.
Maybe more low income people would have turned out to vote for Bernie if he’d pushed this a little harder:
HuffPo 11/3/15 How Bernie Sanders Plans to Transform the Postal Service and Help Millions in Poverty
It’s not a radical idea (and existed in certain areas of this country until 1961):
Some postal services do even more:
The American Postal Workers Union had the sense to endorse Bernie in Nov. 2015. The U.S. Postal Service does a good job, in so many ways; although Repubs are always trying to destroy it. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were backers of the Postal Service functioning as a bank in early 2014. It really irritates me when people unfairly criticize the post office; packages from them arrive more safely, quickly, and economically, when compared to the private companies. On the whole, the postal staff is nicer than the private companies, too. The latter are in such a hurry that they just throw the package on the front porch and don’t even ring the door bell. Time is $$.
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/197479-dems-say-struggling-post-office-branches
Typical quote from a banking lobbyist in regard to post offices conducting some banking services:
“This is the worst idea since the introduction of the Edsel,” said Camden Fine, the chief executive of the Independent Community Bankers of America.
“They can’t even deliver your mail on time. The track record speaks for itself,” Fine added. “If this was about competition, give me all the sloppy competitors I can get.”
As long as big money and lobbyists are in politics, the typical American’s interests will not be considered.
The thing about community bankers opposition to a postal bank is that they aren’t serving the population in need of a postal bank. It’s the high cost check cashing and payday lenders that fill the void. It’s not even as if the community banks are investors in those operations — the banksters do that.
Another big story is why the media gave Trump coverage non-stop, HRC a modest amount, mostly positive, and Bernie Sanders almost nothing, except during Trump’s cancellation rally weekend of March 11. Yes, I know Trump increased ratings, and Bernie was a little known older progressive senator from the small state of Vermont. However, there’s more to this story than the reasons cited above and it looks amiss to me.
Trump said outrageous things that did not trouble advertisers.
Bernie said common sense things that outraged advertisers.
And HRC gave absolutely no indications that she would rock the boat.
AG