I know we’re all trying to look forwards and not re-hash the past of this national election. But nobody can deny that the editorial behavior of cable news played a major role in the 2016 election. After the shock of the unanticipated election results, the TV media pundits did an average of about 20-30 second mea culpa’s about ignoring the “fly-over sates”, and listening to each other too much, they went right back to business as usual, feeding at the Trump info-buffet. The election is over, but they are still here, so the questions are relevant to the present and the future.
So the questions for Rachel, Chris, and the honchos at MSNBC are: Why did Trump get 23 times the amount of coverage that Sanders did as of December 2015, before the primaries? This statistic was reported by The Nation at 12/15. And why did Trump get $2 billion in free air time as of March 2016 as reported in the NY Times? WHY? None of the other candidates got anything like that. Was he somehow more newsworthy than all the other candidates who were in the race as of super Tuesday? Anyone watching MSNBC during that period saw this disproportionate coverage, day after day, week after week — to the degree they had the stomach to keep the TV on!
The imbalance of cable news coverage was extreme to the max, and we need Rachel, Chris, and MSNBC to tell us why they did that? Did they have any idea of the impact this might have? Did they care?
Even though we know the answer, they should be confronted with these questions. The honest answer is what Les Moonves at CBS said "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS,".
It was eyeballs, ratings, and advertising revenue, plain & simple. And this greed in a position of influence & media power has helped give us Trump for the next four years. Thank you Rachel, Chris, and MSNBC.
I only wish one of them had the sense of patriotism & civic duty to come out now for re-instatement of the Fairness Doctrine, even though this would get them fired immediately.