Mediaboss Marketing

The nations red-blue divide means the media have gone from acting blue to feeling it.

House Democrats ended their presentation in President Trumps Senate impeachment trial Friday, and the presidents defense attorneys began laying out their case in a brief Senate session Saturday. The defense will resume its presentation Monday.

The baseless Democratic arguments for impeachment, stretching over three long days and nights, were greeted by a resounding thud of public disinterest. Ratings were down on TV and both senators and bystanders were in poor attendance.

LARA LOGAN: MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS NOT ACKNOWLEDGING SCHIFFS CREDIBILITY ISSUES

The collapse of the whole impeachment effort looks more disastrous than the eighth season of Game of Thrones.

The anti-Trump media cant understand why America wont celebrate the epic oratory of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif. Mediaite said Schiffs call on the Senate to convict Trump and remove him from office was a powerful speech. The Daily Beast declared Schiff Speaks the Truth and far-left Mother Jones referred to the monologue as stirring.

Only Schiff made an embarrassing gaffe as he was closing, further depressing the anti-Trump press. He cited a CBS News report that claimed President Donald Trump had told senators, vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.

GOP senators were unified in their anger at what Chicago Sun-Times Washington Bureau Chief Lynn Sweet called Schiffs unforced error. The New York Times reported Schiffs comment resulted in Enraging the Right.

CNN Senior Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju tweeted that Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said Schiff offended every Republican senator and that no Republican had been told that.

It was a fitting end to Part I of the bogus impeachment trial. Journalists have celebrated the Democratic Party line so far like they were ready to stand up and cheer their star.

The media threw love bombs at Schiff, envisioning him as everyone from famed orator Sen. Daniel Webster to rock superstar Bruce Springsteen. By comparison, former Time editor Rick Stengel said Trump was like the late Soviet tyrannical dictator Josef Stalin.

Self-described conservative Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin was hanging on Schiffs every word. Thank God I was alive to hear Adam Schiff speak these past few days, she tweeted.

Much of the media didnt just celebrate Trumps attackers. They had to silence his supporters, as well.

Long-time Democrat and ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos gave us the memorable image of the week doing just that. He was captured on camera running his hand back and forth across his throat, telling staff to cut away from Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow answering questions.

Its worth remembering that Stephanopoulos is more openly partisan than many of his fellow journalists. He is a former White House communications director for President Bill Clinton and for Bill Clintons 1992 presidential campaign, and he gave $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

But all that adoration was no match for the gang at CNN. Schiff was their shining star and CNN was sure to tell viewers. The networks journalists and pundits nearly wore out the alphabet piling on the praise, terming his speech coherent, cohesive, dazzling, forceful, inspiring, powerful, and remarkable.

The folks at CNN made it clear they were very concerned by impeachment, using the word very 11 times in one segment. Situation Room anchor Wolf Blitzer excelled, celebrating the very, very powerful and forceful speech and noting Schiff made a very, very strong case.

New Day anchor John Berman was so very incensed that senators werent sitting with rapt attention, he whined that they could be could be thrown behind bars for leaving the floor of the Senate. Berman fantasized that 30 of them would be in the slammer right now if [Chief Justice] John Roberts actually enforced the rule.

CNN saw impeachment everywhere even when Trump was the first president to ever speak at the annual March for Life in Washington. Correspondent Kristen Holmes called the speech part of Trumps damage control efforts. It was all happening in the middle of this impeachment trial and that, of course, is very obvious why President Trump would want to speak here today, she said.

The network even stretched the truth to make Schiff more palatable. Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger pretended that Schiff had begun his career as a moderate Democrat. His lifetime score by the American Conservative Union is a 5 on a scale of 1 to 100.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER

President Clintons press secretary-turned-CNN analyst Joe Lockhart tried to win a creative writing award for fiction. Lockhart made up a conversation between Republican senators but didnt admit at first that the only place the conversation took place was in his vivid imagination.

In Lockharts fictional account (also known as a lie) one senator supposedly said of the Democratic accusations against Trump: I havent heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server. If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, were up s creek. (He wasnt referring to the Canadian sitcom.)

Lockhart was mocked for his fake tweet, but his bosses at CNN didnt seem to mind.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Now that the impeachment trial has shifted over to the Trump defense, CNN is already on the case. Fridays Reliable Sources email warned America is about to be hit with a storm of disinformation.

While intended as an attack on Trump, this reads like a description of pretty much every major anti-Trump media report on impeachment especially at CNN.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM DAN GAINOR

Continue reading here:
Dan Gainor: In impeachment trial coverage, liberal media heap praise on Schiff and Democrats prosecuting Trump - Home - WSFX

Hillary Clinton, in a meeting with The Hollywood Reporter, claimed she thinks Democrats need to obtain better control of the media as a way to influence the thinking of Americans.

In the conversation, THRs press reporter asked the previous First Lady just how the left can deal with FoxNews Because the only right-of- facility mainstream media electrical outlet demands to be quit, obviously.

Hillary was all as well anxious to provide her ideas, regreting just how Fox has actually presumably generated propaganda as well as the left demands to tip up their video game as a way of regulating the story.

We do have some well-off people who support Democratic candidates, theres no doubt about that, but theyve never bought a TV station, she responded. Theyve never gobbled up radio stations.

Theyve never created newspapers in local communities to put out propaganda, Clinton included, recommending individuals like Rupert Murdoch at Fox as well as the feared Koch bros have as well as have played a long game about how we really influence the thinking of Americans.

Shes recommending combating fire with her very own viewed fire. Completely disregarding the reality that while Fox leans right, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Vox, as well as most significant print papers are completely possessed subsidiaries of the Democrat event.

RELATED: Hillary Slams Bernie: Nobody Likes Him as well as His Supporters are Misogynists

Among the myriad of various other reasonsMrs Clinton has actually used over the previous couple of years for her unpleasant political election loss to President Trump, the media has actually been a certain target of her ridicule.

She condemned the New York Times for reporting on her e-mail rumor claiming it eventually affected the outcome of the election.

The previous Democratic governmental prospect additionally recommended extremely that the media really did not cover her in a favorable light virtually as high as they must have.

When you have a presidential campaign and the total number of minutes on TV news was 32 minutes, I dont blame voters, she informed the girls of TheView Voters are going to hear what they hear They dont get a broad base of information to make judgments on.

Maybe they could not cover her as a lot due to the fact that they invested 90 percent of their insurance coverage producing detractions for Clintons challenger as well as covering him in a purely unfavorable light.

RELATED: CNN Panelist: Its the Medias Job to Change Voters Minds in 2020

Perhaps a lot more chilling than recommending the left demands to action in as well as influence the means individuals believe, is Hillarys recommendation that she would certainly such as to replicate Barack as well as Michelle Obama by utilizing Hollywood to impact the culture and what people see and therefore what they believe.

While absolutely nothing has actually been wrapped up, Clinton claims she remains in speak about releasing a manufacturing business like the Obamas have with Netflix as well as Spotify.

The Obamas are absolutely right that youve got to impact the culture and what people see and therefore what they believe if youre going to impact the politics and to preserve our democracy, Hillary revealed.

So, I think they made a very smart decision, and maybe someday we will, too, she advised.

This previous summertime a visitor on CNN recommended: We [the media] can transform citizens minds for 2020, thats what we can do if we maintain talking vigorously, as well as we discuss principles.

Hillary as well as the media remain in lockstep on this subject. Clinton really did not shed due to the fact that shes an awful prospect, American cities arent being annihilated due to the fact that of liberal plans, as well as President Trump isnt effective in making America excellent once again due to the fact that of conventional systems.

Its due to the fact that youre as well foolish to recognize what benefits you. In their minds, that has to modification.

Read the original here:
Hillary: Democrats Need to Expand Media Control In Order to Influence Thinking of Americans - The Union Journal

Eva Bartlett

Although Western media has a shoddy track record of lying on Syria (and Libya, Iraq...), the US State Department will pump $35 million more into future war propaganda on Syria, under the guise of promoting honest reporting.

A US State Department grant, Support for Independent Media in Syria, is unabashed in stating one of its main goals is to advance U.S. Government policy objectives in Syria.

That is probably the sole honest clause in the grant description: that it is in the end about US self-serving, hegemonic objectives in Syria.

The description goes on to claim these goals include the defeat of ISISalthough the illegal US-led coalition has attacked Syrian army positions on numerous occasions, ensuring the advance (not defeat) of ISIS in those areas. One of the most glaring instances being the September 2016 repeated attacks on the Syrian army in Deir ez-Zor province, which saw ISIS take over the region.

The US assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, recognized in the region as the man responsible for the near-defeat of ISIS, is another notable example of the US goals being to prolong, not defeat, ISIS in the region.

With their grant, the US plans to advance human rights and promote tolerance and dialogue between ethnic and religious communities, which is again morbidly laughable given that the US has been supporting wahhabi and other extremists whose human rights track records include caging, torturing, raping, and starving civilians, and public executions.

It wouldn't be American policy if the State Department grant didn't include mention of countering Russian disinformation and ending the presence of Iranian forces and proxies in Syria.

However, removing Iranian forces isn't within America's right to do; Syria invited Iran, Russia and other allies to actually fight terrorism in Syria, as opposed to the US-led occupation forces. And as discussed, it isn't Russia that has the track record of disinfo on Syria, that honor goes to America and allies.

Western outlets in chorus promoted the accusations of Syria/Russia preventing food and aid into eastern Aleppo (even Reuters reportedrebels had stockpiled aid) and Madaya and eastern Ghouta (none was true). Western media sold the story of Russia/Syria bombing the home of Omran Daqneesh (didn'thappen), of the al-Quds hospital being reduced to rubble by Russian/Syrian bombing (didn't happen), and a litany of other grotesque war propaganda stories.

Suddenly were meant to find credible journalists who embed with al-Qaeda and whitewash their crimes, and media which have on many occasions used photos not even in Syria to accompany sensationalist war propaganda stories.

CNN and western media got it wrong about Omran Daqneesh, but I havent even seen any retractions for this lie.

And yet the US wants people to believe that the independent voices and Russian and Syrian media who actually reported factually and honestly on these and other issues...are not credible.

The US wants people to live in a fake news bubble, where the narratives are controlled by the war mongers. And, strangely, America seemingly wants Syrians to be subjected to media that reports opposite of the reality they are living. As if after nine years of enduring Western (and Gulf) medias lies Syrians will suddenly believe them and decide to overthrow the president they elected (and support)? America is grasping at straws...

Western nations accuse Russia of disinformation around whether Syria used a chemical weapon in Douma, eastern Ghouta.

In April 2018, Western media pounced on and promoted the White Helmets' lies, shedding crocodile tears over civilians allegedly exposed to a chemical agent, at the same time ignoring or mocking the testimonies of 17 Syrians from Douma (including the boy starring in the White Helmets' hoax video).

Turns out the body tasked to examine this accusation omitted from its final report key findings that poke massive holes in the (Wests) official narrative around Douma. Not one, but many revelations have been leaked about the critical omissions of the OPCW report.

The only ones taking this seriously are mainly Russia, Syria and independent researchers. In the face of these recent revelations, most Western media have largely thus far been silent.

Similarly, Western media didn't cover the December 2018 panel detailing damning findings on the White Helmets' association (and membership) with terrorist groups in Syria, and their involvement in staging chemical attacks and in organ harvesting...

In the State Department's quest for truthful reporting, one of the issues to be protected seemingly at all costs is of course the White Helmets (and the chemical hoaxes they help stage).

Anyone who has seriously researched the White Helmets, much less bothered to interview Syrian civilians about the fake rescue group, knows their footage and claims are as credible as the words of nurse Nayirah, Colin Powell, or the entries of Wikipedia.

Journalists who bothered to interview medical staff in Douma following the chemical hoax were told that doctors were treating patients with normal wartime injuries when strangers (including White Helmets members) entered yelling about a chemical attack, creating a panic (and demonstrating a lack of medical skills), and filming the scene with then 11 year old Hassan Diab.

Diab was one of the Syrians dismissed by western media when he testified to the OPCW that he had not been subject to a chemical attack but had been used by the White Helmets. For Western media, only some children are credible (exploited)...when it suits their narrative.

One such youth, Muhammad, gained notoriety when eastern Ghouta was being liberated. Like the Aleppo child Bana before him, the Ghouta teen had an account in his name on Twitter (the dodgy logistics of which I raised in my last article) and was busy parroting the accusations.

Incidentally, Ghouta (to the silence of media which claimed concern in 2018) is rebuilding, in peace.

In any case, I get the feeling people are tired of lying Western media, chemical hoaxes and the antics of the White Helmets. I certainly see propaganda apologists getting called out on Twitter more than prior, and people are extremely skeptical of chemical weapons accusations.

As Vassily Nebenzia said of the OPCW official report on Douma: Humpty-Dumpty, as we know, sat on a wall, had a great fall and all the kings horses, all the kings men, couldnt put Humpty together again. I mean, that is exactly what happened to FFM report. Exactly.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

See the article here:
US to grant $35 million to promote its fake news bubble in Syria & control local media - RT

MEGHAN and Harry will control their image with a ruthless PR machine after quitting life as senior royals and striking out on their own.

Drawing on Meghan's experience in the entertainment industry, the Sussexes have already built up an extensive group of savvy PR experts to help with their media relations.

3

Last year, Meghan and Harry hired US public relations company Sunshine Sachs whose clients include Jennifer Lopez and Leonardo DiCaprio.

The ruthless PR company, founded by Ken Sunshine, has represented Harvey Weinstein and has uses clever tactics to gloss up its clients' online presence.

The firm worked with Meghan after her controversial editorship of British Vogue last year and she is reportedly relying on them even more following the Sussexes' announcement to step down from royal life.

Former senior advisor to Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, Sara Latham, has been hired as the couple's head of communications.

Along with an impressive PR resume in the US, Latham has been helping politicians with their media presence since the 1990s.

Jessica Mulroney - Meghan's best friend living in Toronto - is also a figure the Sussexes can rely on.

The Canadian stylist and wedding planner - who is married to Ben Mulroney, son of former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney - is also an effective self-publicist.

Legal papers have claimed that Ms Mulroney was enlisted by Meghan to influence the media's portrayal of her and put pressure on a former business adviser of Meghan's to change statements she's given to the Mail on Sunday.

Meghan has also set about carefully controlling her image while setting up home in Vancouver this week when she visited two women's charities.

The Duchess of Sussex vetted pictures and a tweet posted by charity Justice For Women revealing that she made a surprise visit while starting her new life in Canada.

Zoe Craig-Sparrow, a co-director of Justice For Girls, revealed that photographs of Ms Markle at the charity were taken by one of her team and that they had to get the go-ahead from the royal before they were published.

Kate Gibson, director of the Downtown Eastside Womens Centre, also revealed that she had received a mysterious email from the Duchess assistant, asking to drop in and visit the refuge on 15 January to boost the staffs morale on a surprise visit.

Unusually, neither of the visits were announced on their joint Sussex Royal Instagram account.

After leaving her husband, the Duke of Sussex, in the UK to finalise the complex negotiations over their breakaway from the Royal family, many have seen this as the beginning of the Duchess new relationship with the media.

In the announcement laying out theformalities of Megxit, it was confirmed that the couple wants to live a "happy and peaceful" new life out of the royal limelight.

POP STAR GUILTY X Factor's Danny Tetley jailed for 9 years for begging kids for naked pics

BEER WE NO Wetherspoon bans parents with kids from buying more than two alcoholic drinks

BRAND BATTLE Harry and Meghan's royal trademark BLOCKED after complaint by Aussie doctor

Breaking

PAEDO DEATH Man, 29, charged with murdering one of Britains worst paedos

FIRST PLAICE Britain's 15 best fish and chip shops revealed - does YOUR local make the cut?

SNOWING A GALE Snow, heavy rain and strong winds to lash UK as temperatures plummet

The Sussexes outlined their plan to amend their media relations policy on their official website - aiming to "engage with grassroots media organisations and young, up-and-coming journalists."

After launching their Sussex Royal Instagram page last April, the couple aimed to take their media presence into their own hands by directly providing information straight to their followers.

They have cast aside traditional royal reporters.

3

3

We pay for your stories! Do you have a story for The Sun Online news team? Email us at tips@the-sun.co.uk or call 0207 782 4368. You can WhatsApp us on 07810 791 502. We pay for videos too. Click here to upload yours.

More here:
Meghan and Harry will control their image with ruthless Hollywood PR machine after Megxit - The Sun

CBS blinked first.

After less than three hours of live coverage on Tuesday, the network of Walter Cronkite cut away from the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump, yielding to daytime fare like Dr. Phil and Judge Judy.

NBC held out longer, but by 5 p.m., ABC was the last traditional broadcast network still in breaking-news mode. Die-hards could turn to cable news for their fix.

In television terms, the opening hours of Mr. Trumps trial only the third in American history, and the second of the mass-media era did not exactly make for visually compelling viewing. For Republican Senate leadership, that was by design.

Senate officials rejected repeated requests to allow outside cameras into the chamber to record the trial meaning that what viewers see and hear will be dictated by cameras and microphones controlled by Senate staff members, rather than an independent news organization. (Even C-SPAN was not allowed access.)

The result: Audiences were introduced on Tuesday to the constricted, lo-fi view of the Senate floor that will be ubiquitous on the nations TV screens in the coming days.

Election nights have their interactive maps and whiz-bang graphics. State of the Union coverage features high-definition reaction shots of senior government officials, generating the occasional iconic moment think Justice Samuel Alito mouthing Not true when President Barack Obama criticized a Supreme Court opinion on campaign finance.

But the trial of a sitting president? On Tuesday, the small-screen vista was limited to artless shots of House impeachment managers and Mr. Trumps lawyers at their lecterns, with an occasional overhead glimpse of the chamber thrown in.

Squint, and you may have been able to make out an individual senator or two.

The anchor Chris Wallace, commenting as part of Fox Newss analyst team, pointed out what viewers were missing.

Because these are the government set of controlled cameras, we are only able to see the podium and who is speaking, Mr. Wallace said on Tuesday. We are not able to see what is the emotion, what is the state of consciousness of the members of the Senate as all this goes on at considerable length.

MSNBC, whose prime-time opinion shows are a gathering space for liberals, acknowledged the restricted views with some subtle trolling. Attentive viewers might have noticed a graphic in the upper-left corner of the MSNBC screen, noting that the trial footage was provided by Capitol Hill Senate TV: the government, not a news outlet.

CBS gave national affiliates the option of picking up a feed of the trial from CBSN, its streaming-only news channel, after 3 p.m. Its Washington-based evening newscast opened with an extended segment on the trial, with the anchor Norah ODonnell interviewing four of the House impeachment managers.

Journalists for print organizations faced their own hurdles on Tuesday.

As promised by Republican Senate leadership, reporters were herded into roped-off areas in the Capitol hallways as senators entered and left the chamber, a significant change from the free access that journalists there usually enjoy.

When Manu Raju, a CNN reporter, tried to interview two Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine and Cory Gardner of Colorado about the trials rules, the lawmakers ignored him and walked on. On an ordinary day, Mr. Raju would have followed them. On Tuesday, he was stuck in a press pen behind gold stanchions and maroon velvet ropes.

Reporters also had to submit to an extra layer of security screening to get to a balcony that overlooks the Senate floor, a requirement added expressly for the presidents trial.

Having a police officer standing between reporters and the Senate chamber weve had unfettered access to for more than 200 years is extremely frustrating, Sarah Wire, a Los Angeles Times reporter, said on Tuesday, echoing frustrations voiced throughout the Capitol press corps.

Photographers movements in the Capitol were restricted, too, resulting in limited opportunities to capture images of lawmakers on a momentous day.

We have to shoot everyone from a distance; we have very little intimacy, said Melina Mara, a photographer for The Washington Post and the author of a book about women in the Senate. What photojournalists bring is that we show the human beings behind the podiums, and right now we cant get close to any of the members.

Senate officials cited security concerns as the reason for the added restrictions, noting the presence of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. as the trials presiding judge. Michael Steele, a former Republican Party chairman and an MSNBC analyst, offered his own hypothesis.

They dont want the public to see this, Mr. Steele said of the Republicans who control the Senate. They dont want us to assess for ourselves.

Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting.

Continued here:
Trump Trial Day 1: Roped-Off Reporters and TV Cameras Run by the Senate - The New York Times