Bbc, Lefty Media Banned From Whitehouse And Theyre Crying About It.

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Campbell and Blair were having meetings with Murdoch at his holiday home 4 years before the election that first elected Blair, its was a key part of Blairs strategy to win...........the BBC is full of his chums.

Unbiased media.......it don't exist !

 

I make Trump right, if there's no point in talking to them they may as well not be there eating the biscuits !

 

You're right about unbiased media. Even the truth is spun depending on the writer, but it's not about talking to the media it's about dealing with the public. He can ban all of them if he wants to but he's the leader of the "free" world... Everyone has a vested interest in what he's going to do, or not. All he's demonstrating is that he's a reality TV host behaving like a petulant child. This ain't a board meeting.

[BGD 6,436]

Poor snowflake doesn't like the press saying mean things, he needs a safe space

[tb25 4,627]

Or he doesn't like bull shit..

[WILF 47,219]

 

Campbell and Blair were having meetings with Murdoch at his holiday home 4 years before the election that first elected Blair, its was a key part of Blairs strategy to win...........the BBC is full of his chums.

Unbiased media.......it don't exist !

I make Trump right, if there's no point in talking to them they may as well not be there eating the biscuits !

 

You're right about unbiased media. Even the truth is spun depending on the writer, but it's not about talking to the media it's about dealing with the public. He can ban all of them if he wants to but he's the leader of the "free" world... Everyone has a vested interest in what he's going to do, or not. All he's demonstrating is that he's a reality TV host behaving like a petulant child. This ain't a board meeting.

I have to disagree with you in your last couple of lines mate or at least offer an alternative way of looking at it, there's absolutely no point in taking to these people if they are portraying everything as a negative.

I think he is demonstrating that if they don't get themselves together they are an irrelevance in this modern era of information......much has been made of Trumps use of social media but it won him an election when almost every media outlet was against him.......the same media outlets politicians have relied on to win them elections for 40 years or more.

There's no point in talking to the naysayers when you can just talk directly to the people you govern.

[Lenmcharristar 9,816]

 

 

Campbell and Blair were having meetings with Murdoch at his holiday home 4 years before the election that first elected Blair, its was a key part of Blairs strategy to win...........the BBC is full of his chums.

Unbiased media.......it don't exist !

I make Trump right, if there's no point in talking to them they may as well not be there eating the biscuits !

You're right about unbiased media. Even the truth is spun depending on the writer, but it's not about talking to the media it's about dealing with the public. He can ban all of them if he wants to but he's the leader of the "free" world... Everyone has a vested interest in what he's going to do, or not. All he's demonstrating is that he's a reality TV host behaving like a petulant child. This ain't a board meeting.

I have to disagree with you in your last couple of lines mate or at least offer an alternative way of looking at it, there's absolutely no point in taking to these people if they are portraying everything as a negative.

I think he is demonstrating that if they don't get themselves together they are an irrelevance in this modern era of information......much has been made of Trumps use of social media but it won him an election when almost every media outlet was against him.......the same media outlets politicians have relied on to win them elections for 40 years or more.

There's no point in talking to the naysayers when you can just talk directly to the people you govern.

seems to be the labour lovers are the trump haters lololol, the left have ruined the world, the change is already on it's way, liberal haha only if you bow down to what they demand, if you don't they try bully the people who disagree

[WILF 47,219]

They know they are bang in trouble, that's why the response from the media and their masters is getting so viscous

[ChrisJones 7,975]

I have to disagree with you in your last couple of lines mate or at least offer an alternative way of looking at it, there's absolutely no point in taking to these people if they are portraying everything as a negative.

I think he is demonstrating that if they don't get themselves together they are an irrelevance in this modern era of information......much has been made of Trumps use of social media but it won him an election when almost every media outlet was against him.......the same media outlets politicians have relied on to win them elections for 40 years or more.

There's no point in talking to the naysayers when you can just talk directly to the people you govern.

 

I guess I mis-communicated that. The media has shown it's irrelevance but the commander in chief has a duty to report to his employers. Does that sound better?

 

Elected officials may be able to wriggle out of answering questions but they work for us not the other way around. The naysayers are still his employers.

[Lenmcharristar 9,816]

They know they are bang in trouble, that's why the response from the media and their masters is getting so viscous

same as the stunt Katy Perry pulled at the britts, stupid bitch, much as I'd stick it in her ring piece, she needs banned from uk, typical lefty cat lover. Doesn't affect her with her millions

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Or he doesn't like bull shit..

 

It's not bullshit is anymore it's "alternative facts!"

[WILF 47,219]

Find one story in the BBC that gives a balanced view of anything Trump has done, that actually writes both the negative and the positive?.........like his executive order on funding for abortion groups?

Not once did it say "well the bad is that it may lead to unwanted births but the good is that it will save X million infant lives a year"........that is unbiased reporting not the hatchet job we are seeing at the moment.

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Find one story in the BBC that gives a balanced view of anything Trump has done, that actually writes both the negative and the positive?.........like his executive order on funding for abortion groups?

Not once did it say "well the bad is that it may lead to unwanted births but the good is that it will save X million infant lives a year"........that is unbiased reporting not the hatchet job we are seeing at the moment.

 

I can't argue with that, mate. In fact I wrote a whole post on it that at least 2 people read!

 

Again though, the relevance of the media source isn't the issue. It's that elected officials have to justify their positions to their shareholders... Us.

 

We will never see a news source that reports balanced stories. Never. We'll get close but how close depends on the integrity of the guy/gal writing the article. Again the BBC are opinionated bunch of arses like every other news outlet but their American division has every right to ask questions as taxpayers funding the salaries and whims of the elected officials. For a publicly funded civil servant to deny access to the people he serves is more than a little cheeky,

[morton 5,368]

The USA the same as Britain are representative as the two leading lights in democracy around the world,Trump was elected by a democratic constitution.How he then attempts to control and manipulate the press to serve his purpose is more akin to a dictatorship.The BBC,politically,are left wing fantasists and a dictatorship may seek to control them,a democracy as to live with such views,whether we agree with them or not.

[WILF 47,219]

Or......he could just put it in twitter and let people make up their own minds

Edited February 26, 2017 by WILF

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Or......he could just put it in twitter and let people make up their own minds

 

I think social media has been amazing this election cycle. No filters at all just raw feeds. I have no issue with him tweeting at 0300, but if you're going to systematically strip my rights, or my wallet, upset the Australians, or threaten to invade another country, I want your reasoning in a lot more than 160 characters.

[Deadeye18 164]

Now that is good news!