Category Archives: Media

Headline of the day II: And ‘pussygrabber’ too


From the London Daily Mail:

Donald Trump’s Twitter account is the top search result for ‘a**hole,’ ‘bigot,’ and ‘racist’

  • Trump’s Twitter account is one of the top results when ‘a**hole’ is searched
  • He is also the number one result in people search for ‘bigot’ and ‘racist’ 
  • Trump was given the presidential @POTUS account after his inauguration

Headlines of the day: It’s sorta like gilding a turd


From the Washington Post:

Challenged on falsehoods, adviser says Trump team has ‘alternative facts’

  • President Trump’s aides are under fire after his press secretary made easily disproved claims about the size of the inauguration crowd. Chief counselor Kellyanne Conway sparred on “Meet the Press” with Chuck Todd who said, “Alternative facts are not facts.”

And some reaction to all that infantile umbrage from the New York Times:

Even Top Aides Are Troubled by Trump’s Rocky First Weekend

  • President Trump spent his first two days in office lashing out about crowd sizes and rewriting the history of his dealings with intelligence agencies.
  • His lack of focus, at a time when a new president can maximize his leverage, frustrated some senior members of his circle who had urged him to move on.

And from the Independent:

And as for that crowd size, where Donald Trump claimed the largest crowd ever to witness a presidential inauguration and said he personally “saw” between one and one-and-a-half million people standing before him when he spoke. a side by-side comparison of crows at the first Obama inauguration [right] and Saturday’s swearing-in [left] tell a vastly different tale. From the Independent:

blog-crowd

And there was an even bigger turnout for another event in Washington that dwarfed the Trump throngette, reported the New York Times:

The women’s march in Washington was roughly three times the size of the audience at President Trump’s inauguration, crowd counting experts said Saturday.

Marcel Altenburg and Keith Still, crowd scientists at Manchester Metropolitan University in Britain, analyzed photographs and video taken of the National Mall and vicinity and estimated that there were about 160,000 people in those areas in the hour leading up to Mr. Trump’s speech Friday.

They estimated that at least 470,000 people were at the women’s march in Washington in the areas on and near the mall at about 2 p.m. Saturday.

UPDATE: And, of course, Trump tweeted his own response for the anti-inaugural protests [and we feature one response as well]:

blog-trump-tweet

And things get even more petty. . .

UPDATE II: From CNN:

After the National Park Service retweeted messages that negatively compared the crowd sizes at Barack Obama’s 2009 inauguration to Donald Trump’s inauguration Friday, representatives from the new administration asked the Interior Department’s digital team to temporarily stop using Twitter — a decision the agency now claims was out of a concern the account was hacked.

The National Park Service Twitter account retweeted this observation from New York Times reporter Binyamin Appelbaum on Friday: “Compare the crowds: 2009 inauguration at left, 2017 inauguration at right.” The tweet contained images from both events showing an apparent difference in crowd size. The retweet has since been deleted.

After the retweet began to get attention, a career staffer at the Interior Department instructed employees that the “new administration has said that the department and all bureau are not supposed to tweet this weekend and wait for guidance until Monday.”

The message continued, “Please make sure that any scheduled tweets are no longer scheduled,” and referred all questions to another career staffer at the department.

On Saturday, the National Park Service called Friday’s retweets “mistaken.”

UPDATE III: We just spotted this from the editorial cartoonist of the Los Angeles Times:

David Horsey: Trump loathing unifies the diverse

blog-t-horsey

Chart of the day: The online partisan news divide


While television continued to dominate as the primary news source for voters in Campaign 2016, online news is playing an increasing role as the major source of news for voters, as just as the televisual medicascape has become sharply polarized, so too with its online counterpart.

From the Pew Research Center:

blog-media

Chart of the day: Murdoch’s machine dominates


Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News gave us President Pussygrabber.

From a new survey from the Pew Research Center [click on the image to enlarge]:

blog-media

Quotes of the day: TrumpAscension™ auguries


We begin with a prediction from the former House Speaker who served divorce papers on his spouse while she was in the hospital, recovering from cancer surgery, via Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL: Mr. Gingrich, what can we expect during the first 100 days of the Trump presidency?

Gingrich: You can expect a great deal of action. Donald Trump is a very action-oriented person. I think in the first few weeks, you’re going to see a lot of executive orders repealed, peeling back the Obama legacy. You’re going to see steps moving forward across a broad range of fronts, and I think they are likely to be very successful opening weeks.

And from Vox, an exchange between reporter Sean Illing and Guardian cultural critic Stuart Jeffries, author of Grand Hotel Abyss: The Lives of the Frankfurt School, a study of a group of German scholars, many of whom migrated to the U.S. during the Hitler years, who founded critical theory and studied — among other things — the way media impact society:

Sean Illing: Here’s the thing: If Trump’s rise represented an actual substantive rebellion, that at least would suggest a revolution in consciousness. But it’s not that serious. There’s no content behind it. Trump is just a symbol of negation, a big middle finger to the establishment. He’s a TV show for a country transfixed by spectacle.

And so in that sense, Trumpism is exactly what you’d expect a “revolution” in the age of mass media to look like.

Stuart Jeffries: Sadly, I agree. If you listen to Trump speak, it’s all stream-of-consciousness gibberish. There’s no real thought, no real intellectual process, no historical memory. It’s a rhetorical sham, but a kind of brilliant one when you think about it. He’s a projection of his supporters, and he knows it.

He won by capturing attention, and he captured attention by folding pop entertainment into politics, which is something the critical theorists anticipated.

Chart of the day: Americans and their books


blog-books
More from the Gallup report:

The number of Americans who say they read no books in the past year has doubled since the first time Gallup asked this in 1978, from 8% then to 16% now, but has been fairly steady near the current level since 1990.

The results are based on an open-ended question that asked half of Americans to recall the number of books they read all or part of the way through in the past year — the trend wording — and the other half to recall the number of books they read or listened to all or part of the way through. Given that there was no meaningful difference in the answers, the results to the two versions were combined.

Although the survey did not track the types of books that Americans read by age group, book reading in general is fairly similar by age group among U.S. adults. It is a bit more prevalent among the oldest and youngest age groups than among those in the middle years. Roughly nine in 10 adults aged 18 to 29 (91%) report reading at least one book in the past year — possibly related to the required reading among college students within this age group. The percentage among those aged 65 and older is 85%. Nearly four in 10 respondents in both age groups say they read more than 10 books.

The most meaningful differences in reading behavior since 2002 are evident among Americans aged 65 and older. Collectively, they are reading more books than the same age group did in 2002. The percentage reading one or more books increased from 68% to 85%, including a four-percentage-point increase in those reading 11 or more, from 33% to 37%.

esnl, at 70 one of those older readers, consumes an average of 100 books a year, all the old-fashioned way. . .between the covers [though not under the covers, a practice abandoned at about age sixteen when mom finally stopped checking on our nocturnal reading addiction].

Celebrities launch alternative inaugural festivities


They call it the Love-a-thon; we call it the anti-inaugural.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

For those who are, say, less than thrilled about the incoming president can now make some alternate Inauguration Day plans: A celeb-filled telethon will benefit a few of the GOP’s least-favorite things.

Set to take place on Jan. 20 at the same time as the presidential inauguration, the “Love-a-thon” (as it’s being billed) will raise money for Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California and Earthjustice, according to CNN.

So far, Jane Fonda, Jamie Lee Curtis, Judd Apatow and others will be taking part in the telethon of sorts and organizers are looking to raise at least $500,000 for the organizations, via crowdfunding company Crowdrise. Those donating money can choose the group their money will go to.

“It’s a really important opportunity to support causes like Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, Earthjustice, as they gear up to do [critical] work,” organizer Alex Godin told CNN.

The event will take place in New York City and CNN reported the programming will feature comedy skits, music acts and celebrity emcees.