The Media. Can we trust them? Are they fair?

[solo1]

I have arrived at my own conclusion. NO and No.

The First Amendment is being fubar'd.  ALL of the Media, in my view, are guilty of gross lying. 

CNN, ABC, NBC, Associated Press, MSNBC, PBS, Fox too.  Did I miss one?

I generally watch Fox News, keeping in mind that some of their 'news' looks like it came from 'People's Magazine' or  the 'National Enquirer (sp).

I especially dislike AP,  Our local conservative newspaper uses the AP wire service for national news. It seems to be 98% against Trump and all of his actions.

Recently, I noted that on another forum a supposedly conservative news source , in big headlines, claimed that Ruth Bader's doctor told her to step down because she no longer could make knowledgable decisions as a SCOTUS associate. That is false news, Hell, that is pure lying.

Now either the entire profession of the news media believe that some of us will believe these lies OR they are too damn dumb to realize that the only thing going for them is public trust in what they spew..  If they lose that (actually they already have for me,) they have nothing.

That brings me to the last point. Since I know that the media is lying, should I also 'buy' every political statement that is said to be a fact on this forum.

I was amazed that my simple post brought out so many facts, "facts" and discussion. Please don't get me wrong.  I'm not 'above the fray", I just am getting mighty tired of seeing and reading all the s*** that passes for news and enlightenment nationwise.

Is it '1984' yet?

[G-Man]

I have arrived at my own conclusion. NO and No.

The First Amendment is being fubar'd.  ALL of the Media, in my view, are guilty of gross lying. 

CNN, ABC, NBC, Associated Press, MSNBC, PBS, Fox too.  Did I miss one?

I generally watch Fox News, keeping in mind that some of their 'news' looks like it came from 'People's Magazine' or  the 'National Enquirer (sp).

I especially dislike AP,  Our local conservative newspaper uses the AP wire service for national news. It seems to be 98% against Trump and all of his actions.

Recently, I noted that on another forum a supposedly conservative news source , in big headlines, claimed that Ruth Bader's doctor told her to step down because she no longer could make knowledgable decisions as a SCOTUS associate. That is false news, Hell, that is pure lying.

Now either the entire profession of the news media believe that some of us will believe these lies OR they are too damn dumb to realize that the only thing going for them is public trust in what they spew..  If they lose that (actually they already have for me,) they have nothing.

That brings me to the last point. Since I know that the media is lying, should I also 'buy' every political statement that is said to be a fact on this forum.

I was amazed that my simple post brought out so many facts, "facts" and discussion. Please don't get me wrong.  I'm not 'above the fray", I just am getting mighty tired of seeing and reading all the s*** that passes for news and enlightenment nationwise.

Is it '1984' yet?

Knowing what to "believe" or even consider accurate is near impossible.  In medical school, we were taught how to read articles whether in magazines, newspapers, or medical journals.  In order to make sense of the information being presented you need to take into consideration a lot of different things.......... Who's writing it, why?, who's paying for it, who benefits by it, sample size, transparency, etc.

One rule of thumb I use: If there is no named source, and the unnamed source is the only thing the story is based on, the story isn't true.  A person accused has the right to face their accuser. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

"The Media" is a pretty broad swath. There are many I trust, there are many I don't. Without a Free Press we have nothing.
  I think your little post got such a response partly because the other was pulled and people wanted to vent. (And there is a general dislike of some here)
 Just because there are unnamed sources doesn't make it untrue. We have a right to face our accusers in a court of law not in the press. If a person feels they have been libeled there is recourse for that.

[f6john]

The media is now used as an entertainment industry. Ratings mater and translate to $$$. Any news outlet that allows their broadcasters to espouse their personal opinions as has been the norm is no longer a serious news agency. If only facts were reported, the 24 hour news outlets would have to repeat themselves every 5 minutes.

I wish some senior journalist with some credibility, maybe Tom Brokaw, would take this issue on in a public way.

[solo1]

"Without a Free Press, we have nothing"   quote by Meathead.

True.  however, the "Free Press" can no longer be trusted.  They are guaranteed a "free Ride" under the First Amendment.  They have taken advantage of that and now are forcefully pushing their agenda by purposely publishing false news, the word false is a PC word that really means  a lie.

Trusting them now amounts to hoping that they are true to the profession of REPORTING the news.
Too often, it is not reporting that they do but rendering opinions masquerading as reporting.

How to tell the difference becomes very hard.  Confronting them is like getting into a pissing contest with a skunk.

[Oss]

That is what got Hamilton killed in a duel. 

Free ain t free. There is a cost for shooting off your mouth

[The emperor has no clothes]

"Without a Free Press, we have nothing"   quote by Meathead.

True.  however, the "Free Press" can no longer be trusted.  They are guaranteed a "free Ride" under the First Amendment.  They have taken advantage of that and now are forcefully pushing their agenda by purposely publishing false news, the word false is a PC word that really means  a lie.

Trusting them now amounts to hoping that they are true to the profession of REPORTING the news.
Too often, it is not reporting that they do but rendering opinions masquerading as reporting.

How to tell the difference becomes very hard.  Confronting them is like getting into a pissing contest with a skunk.

I agree with your assessments of opinions. But all we can do is do our best to discern the difference. I see no other choice.

[Alpha Dog]

The main stream news has not been news for quite some time.  It has only become clear finally to a majority of Americans in the most recent election cycle.  And they are not main stream, they only think they are and mainly talk among themselves.  They have little understanding of fly over America.  They are opinion writers and speakers.  The polls show they have a very low credibility rating and are out of touch.  They try to push narratives that are simply unfounded.   I could go on and on, instead I will say Journalism is Dead.

[solo1]

The old computer saying might apply here. GI, GO.  Garbage in, garbage out.

How do we know what's garbage and what's not?   As a former city councilman, I was always surprised at what the media reported as compared to what the council actually said.  You need a filter for the 'colorization"  It was easy for me 'cause I was there.

[The emperor has no clothes]

The main stream news has not been news for quite some time.  It has only become clear finally to a majority of Americans in the most recent election cycle.  And they are not main stream, they only think they are and mainly talk among themselves.  They have little understanding of fly over America.  They are opinion writers and speakers.  The polls show they have a very low credibility rating and are out of touch.  They try to push narratives that are simply unfounded.   I could go on and on, instead I will say Journalism is Dead.

Journalism is far from dead. There are many credible, honest, fair journalists out there. You just have to wade thru a fair amount of BS.

[old2soon]

When I saw some of the national "news" outlets "reporting" on hilarys loss and how it was reported-some of the stunned looks and tears were priceless-it nailed the lid on the coffin of the "news" pretty much shut for me. Far as "trust" goes-well I M H O-been awhile since they Earned MY trust. Wayne-the pure hatred for President Trump is palpable! Tween the courts and the "news" putting road blocks up every time he turns around-well I'm thinkin a red headed step child gits treated better than the current POTUS does.   Even here at the local level "news" impartial has gone by the wayside. RIDE SAFE.

[..]

The main stream news has not been news for quite some time.  It has only become clear finally to a majority of Americans in the most recent election cycle.  And they are not main stream, they only think they are and mainly talk among themselves.  They have little understanding of fly over America.  They are opinion writers and speakers.  The polls show they have a very low credibility rating and are out of touch.  They try to push narratives that are simply unfounded.   I could go on and on, instead I will say Journalism is Dead.

Journalism is far from dead. There are many credible, honest, fair journalists out there. You just have to wade thru a fair amount of BS.

I wonder who would count among the credible, honest, fair journalists out there?

Separate to the question above.

If anyone looks to only "their" side for "news" they are going to be slowly sucked into a quagmire of bias.

[MP]

 Just because there are unnamed sources doesn't make it untrue. We have a right to face our accusers in a court of law not in the press. If a person feels they have been libeled there is recourse for that.

But, when naming an "unnamed source", it should be that the reporter finds at least one other, separate, source to verify.  Just to run with a story that fits the reporters agenda, because one, unnamed source, says it, is wrong.

We hear all the time "it is reported", "unnamed source", "others have said", etc., and that is reported as NEWS.  It is NOT news.

On election night, I was switching back and forth thru a number of channels, just to get a feel about what they were saying.  The giddiness early on, the laughter, the celebration, of the vast majority of the so called reports was ovrr the top. They were celebrating Hillarys win.

Then, when the actual numbers started to come in, and it was becoming apparant that Trump was winning, they were crying, they were despondant, etc.

Their bias was over the top.  I thought that they were there to report the news, not make it, or shape it?

Now, about 97% of Trump stories are negative.  Made up stories, etc.  It is sickening.

To say that there are "lots" of responsible reporters may be true.  But they must all be in towns like Waterloo, IA, because they sure as hell are NOT on the national news! 

I used to be wary of the news, because anytime I knew first hand about a local story in the news, it was a foregone conclusion that a number of the "facts" in the story would be wrong.  Just facts, local stories, no ideology involved.

Now, I assume everything I hear on the news is a lie. Period.  Until  proven true.

[hubcapsc]

I made a post last week about a Confederate Memorial Day service I
attended. The other attendees included a state senator, local business
men, SCV and UDC leaders and all the rest of us. If "the media" had also
attended (they did not) I know for sure which attendee they exclusively
would have sought an interview from. He might be a really nice guy,
I don't know him. Can you pick him out from this picture?



-Mike

[Alpha Dog]

The main stream news has not been news for quite some time.  It has only become clear finally to a majority of Americans in the most recent election cycle.  And they are not main stream, they only think they are and mainly talk among themselves.  They have little understanding of fly over America.  They are opinion writers and speakers.  The polls show they have a very low credibility rating and are out of touch.  They try to push narratives that are simply unfounded.   I could go on and on, instead I will say Journalism is Dead.

Journalism is far from dead. There are many credible, honest, fair journalists out there. You just have to wade thru a fair amount of BS.

I no of none, at least in the so called MSM  actually LSM.   And I have no desire to wade through BS

Just give me the news of what is going on.  I do not need some fair haired Ivy league journalist to tell me what is really going on or what I should think.  Give me just the facts ma'am as Joe Friday use to say.   I will draw my own conclusions.  Now they just make sh*t up and pass it on as gospel.  If you like them keep listening.  I stopped many years ago and found alternative sources.   

[The emperor has no clothes]

The main stream news has not been news for quite some time.  It has only become clear finally to a majority of Americans in the most recent election cycle.  And they are not main stream, they only think they are and mainly talk among themselves.  They have little understanding of fly over America.  They are opinion writers and speakers.  The polls show they have a very low credibility rating and are out of touch.  They try to push narratives that are simply unfounded.   I could go on and on, instead I will say Journalism is Dead.

Journalism is far from dead. There are many credible, honest, fair journalists out there. You just have to wade thru a fair amount of BS.

I no of none, at least in the so called MSM  actually LSM.   And I have no desire to wade through BS

Just give me the news of what is going on.  I do not need some fair haired Ivy league journalist to tell me what is really going on or what I should think.  Give me just the facts ma'am as Joe Friday use to say.   I will draw my own conclusions.  Now they just make sh*t up and pass it on as gospel.  If you like them keep listening.  I stopped many years ago and found alternative sources.   

Such as ?

[solo1]

"Such as" quote by Meathead.

 I could ask you the same question,  If you asked me, I would say I don't know and in all honesty, you might have to do the same.  I trust no media reporters except one.

His name is Kevin Leininger, a reporter for the local conservative newspaper.  I trust him and know him personally.  However, when he writes a column about local happenings and clearly states his opinion vs reporting, the newspaper prints a disclaimer after his column.  However, the same newspaper uses AP for national news which is full of disparaging remarks about President Trump.   No disclaimer...........Go figure.

[Patrick]

We have to get our news from somewhere. Everyone seems to have their particular favorite.  Personally I want to hear the person [ like our President] speak and decide whether he can be believed or trusted. I don't like someone telling me the meaning of what someone else said.

[Jess from VA]

Turn them off and tune them out.  Vote with your remote.  I have.

I read all my news.  It's somewhat better than the TV.  But I look for slant (it's not hard to find, if you are looking for it), and if it smells I move on.

CNN and MSNBC have fully become the American version of Pravda in the Soviet heyday (full on leftist propaganda) (but all the others are not much better).  I mean, if you watch long enough and get to some news about something non political, and non-left agenda important (you know, like the weather or sports or even the recent mass murder in England), you might actually get some objective news.  But I play a game, I tune in CNN and see what's on, but the moment the Trump or conservative hate comes on, I change the channel.  This often only takes 10 to 20 seconds, sometimes I can even watch for a few minutes.  And you quickly get to know the talking heads you never want to watch, like Don Lemon (and many others).

For a number of years under Zero, and especially during the election, I used to watch American Pravda channels, just to see how they were spinning this or that.  Simple counterintelligence to see how the enemy is thinking and what it is doing.  The more hate they dialed up and the louder they yelled, you knew the more important the issue was to them, or the more they felt they were being hurt.

And the most satisfying, happiest thing in the world happened when Trump won, despite the full on 2-year long hate campaign of the main stream media against him.  The MSM was beaten (and tuned out, and disbelieved, and despised) every bit as much as HRC was beaten.  Clearly that was their wake up call, and now any pretense of objectivity has been abandoned and it is all payback, disrupt, and hate 24 X 7.

It is one of the greatest ironies that the First Amendment (as interpreted in the courts for a couple hundred years) is so fundamental to American life, is used as a sword instead of a shield by main stream media to utterly abandon the concept of reporting objective news, to become a full on left wing propaganda machine only interested in advancing their cause, to the point of being nothing more than a wing of the Democratic Party, with free advertising and cheer-leading, and hating the other side 24 X 7.    

But since the election and the full on disrupt game plan is fully in place, I have tuned them out almost entirely..... there is no need to watch any of it, because you know what they are doing.  All we can do in a capitalist society is to boycott them entirely, tune them out, and hope the loss of revenue puts the hurt on them.  You can also write them letters, if you have some time to waste.

Make no mistake, the main stream media is now fully and completely an enemy of the people (the people who count).

[The emperor has no clothes]

"Such as" quote by Meathead.

 I could ask you the same question,  If you asked me, I would say I don't know and in all honesty, you might have to do the same.  I trust no media reporters except one.

His name is Kevin Leininger, a reporter for the local conservative newspaper.  I trust him and know him personally.  However, when he writes a column about local happenings and clearly states his opinion vs reporting, the newspaper prints a disclaimer after his column.  However, the same newspaper uses AP for national news which is full of disparaging remarks about President Trump.   No disclaimer...........Go figure.

I thought he was saying he had turned to alternate ways of getting his info. As far as reporters that I think are honest and professional, I'll just keep that to myself. It would just quickly devolve into another locked thread.

[Robert]

Turn them off and tune them out.  Vote with your remote.  I have.

I read all my news.  It's somewhat better than the TV.  But I look for slant (it's not hard to find, if you are looking for it), and if it smells I move on.

Agreed with your thoughts Jess 

[hubcapsc]

I just stumbled onto this story. To me, this is good. I've never heard of this outlet,
nor this author.

http://thehayride.com/2017/05/dont-live-anymore-problem-new-orleans/

EDIT: as I look back at some content at the site, I see it is Southern oriented
and seems conservative... I guess I've outed myself 

-Mike

[Robert]

I just stumbled onto this story. To me, this is good. I've never heard of this outlet,
nor this author.

http://thehayride.com/2017/05/dont-live-anymore-problem-new-orleans/

EDIT: as I look back at some content at the site, I see it is Southern oriented
and seems conservative... I guess I've outed myself 

-Mike

[Daniel Meyer]

The media has ALWAYS been biased...the keys to getting accurate views of the world were:

1) An educated consumer. We've been removing morals, critical thinking, and questioning of authority from the schools for three generations. The educated consumer is now *despite* the educational system, rather than *because* of it.

2) The media is in the business of...making money. There is no higher "benefit the public" or other nonsense...never has been...and producing/distributing news is EXPENSIVE...as a result...the media is a DIRECT reflection of what the public has a taste for seeing/hearing.

The media isn't driving the stupidity...they are *responding* to it.

Food for thought...(worked in media all my life...)

[solo1]

Yes, Daniel, we are now on the third generation of many who have been raised to blame others, not take responsibility for ones action, and believing that the government is there to solve all problems with cash and 'it's not your fault'

The liberal universities have quite their share of this generation of graduates who have found a home in the MEDIA.  "Nuff said.

Ethics and Journalism, for whatever reason, is now absent from the media.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Yes, Daniel, we are now on the third generation of many who have been raised to blame others, not take responsibility for ones action, and believing that the government is there to solve all problems with cash and 'it's not your fault'

The liberal universities have quite their share of this generation of graduates who have found a home in the MEDIA.  "Nuff said.

Ethics and Journalism, for whatever reason, is now absent from the media.

It's amazing how two people can read the same post and come away with differing ideas of what was said.

[Wizzard]

Yes, Daniel, we are now on the third generation of many who have been raised to blame others, not take responsibility for ones action, and believing that the government is there to solve all problems with cash and 'it's not your fault'

The liberal universities have quite their share of this generation of graduates who have found a home in the MEDIA.  "Nuff said.

Ethics and Journalism, for whatever reason, is now absent from the media.

It's amazing how two people can read the same post and come away with differing ideas of what was said.

That all depends on what your pre-conceived notions or thoughts were before you read it. To get the full benefit you have to be open minded. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

Yes, Daniel, we are now on the third generation of many who have been raised to blame others, not take responsibility for ones action, and believing that the government is there to solve all problems with cash and 'it's not your fault'

The liberal universities have quite their share of this generation of graduates who have found a home in the MEDIA.  "Nuff said.

Ethics and Journalism, for whatever reason, is now absent from the media.

It's amazing how two people can read the same post and come away with differing ideas of what was said.

That all depends on what your pre-conceived notions or thoughts were before you read it. To get the full benefit you have to be open minded. 

Did you feel Daniel was saying ethics and journalism is now absent from the media ? That's sure not how I took his post. It seemed to me he was saying media is driven by society as whole and we have to look for the ethical reporters.
 

[Daniel Meyer]

Yes, Daniel, we are now on the third generation of many who have been raised to blame others, not take responsibility for ones action, and believing that the government is there to solve all problems with cash and 'it's not your fault'

The liberal universities have quite their share of this generation of graduates who have found a home in the MEDIA.  "Nuff said.

Ethics and Journalism, for whatever reason, is now absent from the media.

It's amazing how two people can read the same post and come away with differing ideas of what was said.

That all depends on what your pre-conceived notions or thoughts were before you read it. To get the full benefit you have to be open minded.  

Did you feel Daniel was saying ethics and journalism is now absent from the media ? That's sure not how I took his post. It seemed to me he was saying media is driven by society as whole and we have to look for the ethical reporters.
 

Sort of...kind of...a little of both...but not really

Ethics and journalism...or rather...ethics IN journalism...is very relative...and is not NOW absent...it has NEVER been there...a cursory look at the history of media itself easily shows this...the ethics have ALWAYS been audience driven.

And...it's always biased...and usually there is balance...plenty of outlets, biased in all different directions. The educated consumer could read "between the lines" and get the (more or less) real story...

Today, we've lost the critical thinking in the general public...and the 'net and massive number of news stations has made it even worse because your OWN bias very much determines what you see...you reinforce your own leanings (confirmation bias) by selecting sources that lean your way and ignoring others. The 'net in particular...shows you EXACTLY what you are looking for.

And every single media outlet...ever...has been about getting audience...and they will cater to what the audience wants. SOME of them will stick to the "truth"...more or less...they will tell the truth about the side they (their audience) favors, and either ignore the other facts...or present them in a less favorable light.

OUR (the audience's) responsibility is to find the folks that stick to the truth (in their biased direction) AND the folks that stick to the truth in opposing views and draw our conclusions from that...and quite frankly, in this age of social media and forums, is the part that's missing.

edit: I should also mention...that the real-time knowledge that the media outlets have of who's reading/watching, what they're reading/watching, how long they read/watch, and their previous/later searches etc (yep, even on cable/netflix/etc), tells them what is popular and they can immediately tune towards that.

Bash republicans? Well look at the hits climb! AND it's the young/upcoming generation! They're our future customers! Put more of that on!

Bash liberals? Man, that one bombed...less of that please...

Eventually there's little balance left...and the tracking influencing the available material becomes it's own source of bias as there is less opposing material to "get hits" and clue them in that somebody may be leaning that way.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Thanks 

[Jess from VA]

I certainly understand Daniel's point about media being market driven for their financial/economic benefit.  And it is certainly true.

However, I also firmly believe we have a media that favors leftist policy (from top to bottom) in their own personal beliefs, and that permeates the entire media (also top to bottom, from the stockholders, to CEOs, to news directors, to talking heads, to writers, to the guy on the street with a microphone).  Exactly like the education system (also from top to bottom, Fed education dept, unions, K-12, and universities).  And also a very high percentage of career Federal and (urban) State civil servants.  Add the Free crap Army and the inexplicable highly educated left, and you really have a crowd.  

In essence, a cultural war that will be going on for long past our dirt naps.  But one worth fighting.

[solo1]

Interesting.  That means that the media gives its audience what they want to hear,  because of $$$$

Does that also mean that the media is 'selling' its viewpoint in order to persuade more viewers so as to get a larger share of $$$

IMO and observation having been around for a time, the bias that Daniel mentions has always been there, i agree.   However, it has never been this blatant before in my memory.

My perception is that journalism is not to be trusted with the truth.  Sure, there still are those who do practice good journalism but how do we apply a standard when the waters  are so muddied?

[Daycruiser]

Anybody that believes anything the Media (TV and Print) broadcasts or prints is a fool.  The media as a whole is corrupt, do your own research and study the words the politicians use carefully.  You'll live longer.  Personally I pay very little antention to the news media except for non-political events, i.e Weather, Sports etc.

[Gavin_Sons]

Anybody that believes anything the Media (TV and Print) broadcasts or prints is a fool.  The media as a hole is corrupt, do your own research and study the words the politicians use carefully.  You'll live longer.  Personally I pay very little antention to the news media except for non-political events, i.e Weather, Sports etc.

Dont forget to google what part of the media rothchild owns. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

Anybody that believes anything the Media (TV and Print) broadcasts or prints is a fool.  The media as a hole is corrupt, do your own research and study the words the politicians use carefully.  You'll live longer.  Personally I pay very little antention to the news media except for non-political events, i.e Weather, Sports etc.

Dont forget to google what part of the media rothchild owns. 

You've got to spell it correctly to be able to pull that off. 

[Hooter]

Watching the news is like watching "Ripleys Believe it or Not". It's almost worse than reality TV.

[G-Man]

I certainly understand Daniel's point about media being market driven for their financial/economic benefit.  And it is certainly true.

However, I also firmly believe we have a media that favors leftist policy (from top to bottom) in their own personal beliefs, and that permeates the entire media (also top to bottom, from the stockholders, to CEOs, to news directors, to talking heads, to writers, to the guy on the street with a microphone).  Exactly like the education system (also from top to bottom, Fed education dept, unions, K-12, and universities).  And also a very high percentage of career Federal and (urban) State civil servants.  Add the Free crap Army and the inexplicable highly educated left, and you really have a crowd.  

In essence, a cultural war that will be going on for long past our dirt naps.  But one worth fighting.

Also, many "newscasters" have family members in politics.  CNN's morning guy had a father and has a brother entrenched in New York Liberalism.  A morning hottie on FOX has a senator father.  Anderson Cooper is a NY Vanderbilt.  Another woman on FOX is Cheney's daughter.  There are more media/politics relationships, these just popped into my head at this time.

[bagelboy]

Tell me the media is not biased. Read the NY Daily news or NY Times and tell me it's not biased. Find one, one favorable article about Trump since he was elected. These two papers continue to chastise and put down every move he makes.  The scarier thing is, when Obama was president, they defended every move he made. I fear if Hillary had won! they would have done the same. This in itself can be just as dangerous as bashing our current President!

[G-Man]

Tell me the media is not biased. Read the NY Daily news or NY Times and tell me it's not biased. Find one, one favorable article about Trump since he was elected. These two papers continue to chastise and put down every move he makes.  The scarier thing is, when Obama was president, they defended every move he made. I fear if Hillary had won! they would have done the same. This in itself can be just as dangerous as bashing our current President!

I believe the most recent ratio was 80% negative to 20% on the major networks and cable "news". 

BUT,......... Fox, clearly outnumbered, was getting half of the nightly "news" watchers.

If it was all economically driven, wouldn't more have jumped over to Fox's side?  Especially now since FOX took a hit over Ailes and O'Reilly.  If there was another conservative network, they would have picked up millions of viewers. 

[Alpha Dog]

Tell me the media is not biased. Read the NY Daily news or NY Times and tell me it's not biased. Find one, one favorable article about Trump since he was elected. These two papers continue to chastise and put down every move he makes.  The scarier thing is, when Obama was president, they defended every move he made. I fear if Hillary had won! they would have done the same. This in itself can be just as dangerous as bashing our current President!

I believe the most recent ratio was 80% negative to 20% on the major networks and cable "news". 

BUT,......... Fox, clearly outnumbered, was getting half of the nightly "news" watchers.

If it was all economically driven, wouldn't more have jumped over to Fox's side?  Especially now since FOX took a hit over Ailes and O'Reilly.  If there was another conservative network, they would have picked up millions of viewers. 

Recent Harvard Study showing negatives of Trump coverage at 93 percent at lame stream media.   Some a little less.  The Old York Times about 85 percent negative.  Fox New  52 percent negative  ( still some swamp feeders there ) and 48 percent favorable.  Guess that makes them fair and balanced - whatever.   Bush the second in a kinder and gentler era of sorts brought in 60 percent negative.   The past Pres. only garnered 40 percent negative.  I guess things were just going along kushy well the previous 8 years as the middle class took a standard of living decline.