• nova_ad_vitum
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That part can’t completely change simply because the mechanics of it are too fundamental and too blunt. A Presidential candidate who is the front runner for one of the two parties saying they want to deploy troops is news. It’s newsworthy. They can’t just ignore it and if they did they would be doing the news anymore.

    It’s the same as all the way back in 2016 - after Trump won the election, the NYT published a lengthy, complicated story detailing his many conflicts of interest which probably took a team or reporters months to do. And on the same day it was published Trump tweeted that there had been “3 million fraudulent votes” (still waiting on the evidence of that btw).

    That move drowned out the conflict of interest story by a lot, and more than that - the president elect saying shit like that is actually genuinely news. The news media can’t just ignore it.

    They’ve gotten a bit better over the years at dealing with him . Now they’ll say stuff like “Trump asserted yet again, without evidence, that he won the 2020 election” instead of just regurgitating his nonsense without context. But them ignoring Trump isn’t the answer.

    The problem here is that many Americans want this guy as president the first place.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s the same as all the way back in 2016 - after Trump won the election, the NYT published a lengthy, complicated story detailing his many conflicts of interest which probably took a team or reporters months to do.

      There’s still plenty of room for criticism of the media, though – like the fact that the piece you mention was published after the election instead of before it, for instance.