• fireweed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    11 days ago

    The decision not to carry the speech live is not actually unusual: Networks usually weight the subject matter and context, and all have in the past declined to run speeches from Presidents Biden, Obama and Bush, among others.

    Because the headline alone makes this sound like a bigger deal than it is.

    • ryper@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      10 days ago

      None of those presidents were as vindictive or as easily triggered as Trump. Not giving him a platform is somewhat risky.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 days ago

        None of the other presidents made speeches gathering the world press at the four seasons landscaping, or to promote their new hotel.

        Giving him an all access mic at all times is also dangerous.

  • Drusas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    10 days ago

    ITT: People who didn’t read the article.

    These stations are still planning to cover the speech. They’re not ignoring it.

  • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    11 days ago

    Baby is getting fussy… baby wants attention on The White Crib from national news networks.

  • Zephorah@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 days ago

    In this case, it probably should be aired the general public hears how he intends to interfere with elections.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 days ago

      If you read the article, it explains that they will still cover the speech, just not air it life without commentary.

      • Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 days ago

        Thanks, I don’t have the energy to engage with this and read the article right now and that’s helpful context

  • bigbangdangler@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 days ago

    I’d prefer they air it. While it’s true that it’s just an advertisement for his same old bullshit, it’s also important. He should be allowed to further make an ass of himself by any means necessary.

    Not carrying it folds into the MAGA narrative and is worse than just showing the thing.

    • PNW clouds@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’ll repeat my comment above. I’d rather they cover it the next day or however much time they need to present it fully fact-checked.

      Airing it without side by side fact checking is irresponsible with midterms coming up.

      • bigbangdangler@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        I don’t disagree with you in principle. That is a better way to handle it overall.

        But MAGA will run with “Trump was not allowed to speak on mainstream media”, and I’d argue that’s worse than being principled here. The reality is more nuanced.

        • PNW clouds@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Except even if everyone and their youtube podcast covered it in real time…

          MAGA will just say it wasn’t covered.

          And use AOC clips to show she said it shouldn’t be.

          So why not cover it responsibly so when the ones on the cusp of learning the truth, can find it.

          There’s no reason to cover it live and un-fact checked.

          I would gently argue back that they will lie no matter what. So why publicise the lies as if they are real facts? Why pre-empt everything in prime time to just show uncontested propaganda?

          Why not cover it on the nightly news at 11 as the event it really is?

          The echo chamber will be on CBS and Fox anyway. I didn’t/haven’t/won’t watch it… did he say the lamestream media won’t carry him? That the dumb-o-crats don’t want him heard?

          Give the people who are just trying to avoid politics and watch their show a break and report on it responsibly during the news. Let them hear the jokes after and look it up, to find it was reported on and covered responsibly.

          Don’t let repetition of lies and baseless accusations be the earworm that becomes what people not plugged in to all this think is the truth because it was aired unchallenged.

    • Valentine Angell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 days ago

      Not carrying it folds into the MAGA narrative and is worse than just showing the thing.

      That’s a good point. I didn’t think of it in those terms.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    I was watching his stuff before because I wanted to know what new craziness was going to happen but I realized I can’t immediately do anything about it and its easier to go through after all the lies are fact checked. Man I did see his. Why does it take so long to count ballots. Counting faster does not make election counts more accurate. It takes time when you follow custody rules and such in a large city. ugh.

  • BigMacHole@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 days ago

    Good! I would MUCH Rather have the Anchors explain WHY this is all a Good thing then to Watch it LIVE without someone Telling me WHAT to Think!

    -Free Thinkers!

    • PNW clouds@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’d rather they run it later, with it fully fact-checked, instead of letting dubious statements be reported as facts because they can’t keep up.