Fox News sides with Trump/Spicer in war against media

Maybe so. But it's also the truth on how you libs work.

 

LOL. Well apparently Trump did. He thought it so important to make it the focus of Spicer's first meeting with the press and a good part of the subsequent "official" presser.

 

I do not follow why is this an absurd claim?
If you include all the new forms of livestreaming events, that were not available until recently, then it is easy to imagine more people saw this event than ever.

What facts do you do you have to disprove it?

In this clip, the reporter gaggle seemed to guffaw at the thought more people saw Trump's inaugural than Reagan's. My reaction was to guffaw at the reporters. Of course more people saw this one. There was no Internet in 1981. I am biased, but IMO Spicer destroys this guy's position.

 

I will go even further, on the general topic, I think we are finally seeing the death of the mainstream US media as it has existed for the past couple of decades. I think the American people have finally caught up to them. And I am pretty pleased about this.

I think their game is drying up. I think they know it. I think they are going to fight hard to keep what they have. These folks will not give up their cushy, elitist lifestyles easily. And so Trump/Spicer will have to come out every day and fight them. People on my side generally may also have to shout everyday just to be heard over them.

But they are going down, like Enron did. In case you guys do not recall, Enron won Fortune Mag's "Most Innovative Company In America" for 6 years in a row from 1995-2000. Then, all of a sudden it imploded. Almost no one saw it coming. I think our national media is going to go out in some similar fashion.

Guffaw if you like (I hope some of you do), but remember, I also got both Brexit and Trump correct, well in advance.

 

Trump and Spicer are trying to defend the administration against some of the lies that have come out about the inauguration.

 

Here is the full text of the statement he read. Essentially, he spent the majority of the text calling the media dishonest when at best Spicer had his facts wrong (floor coverings, magnometers, and METRO ride numbers). Essentially, the only thing that was correct with regards to the inauguration was the viewership which they didn't explain until today. Even DJT tried to use the overnight ratings to support the stance. Hint: Overnight ratings were less than Reagan '81 and Obama '09 by a sizable margin.

It's pretty absurd to chastise the media for accurate reporting which is exactly what Spicer did with the exception of the MLK bust which was a single reporter that apologized (and Trump accepted the apology) before the statement was delivered.

To start with this admonishment then move on to browbeat the media for not covering the CIA speech differently when Donald Trump spent over 50% of the speech talking about his inauguration was crazy.

Spicer was like an angry parent that comes home and takes out his anger on the kids even though they did nothing wrong.

"Why didn't you put away the dishes and take out the garbage!" Spicer exclaimed. "But Dad, that's the chores for yesterday and I completed them" replied Johny.

 

What lies?

 

The picture that showed the difference between Obama's crowd and Trump's crowd when Obama's picture was taken at the crowd apex and Trump's wasn't. MlLK's bust.(which you've mentioned) You might buy that was an accident but I don't. Like it or not it does seem to be the biggest audience of all time which the media constantly said it wasn't. Spicer put the press in its place today and it was a good thing to see.

 

"Biggest audience of all time"? Trump tried to say in person and viewers. Clearly the first was incorrect as any sane person would admit. I'll give you the latter simply because the internet makes it so easy for anyone to watch it. Of course, it took awhile for them to clarify that they were including the unmeasurable internet viewers.

 

And now we have the evidence --

Trump’s inauguration broke live video streaming records

"....... The event has broken new ground, becoming the largest, single live news event that content delivery network Akamai has ever hosted, the company says, following an analysis of its live video data.

According to Akamai, live video streaming of the inauguration peaked at 8.7 Tbps at 12:04 ET during the opening of President Trump’s speech, up from 7.9 Tbps at the start of the inaugural oath. This surpassed the previous record of 7.5 Tbps, which was achieved on Election Day (Nov. 8, 2016) during the evening.

* * *

However, when comparing the inauguration with other more recent events, it still came out on top. For example, the 2016 Euro soccer tournament final peaked at 7.3 Tbps and the Rio women’s team gymnastics final hit 4.5 Tbps.

“The presidential inauguration is the latest in a series of record-breaking live, online video streaming events that we have supported over the last year,” said Bill Wheaton, Executive Vice President and General Manager of Media at Akamai, in a statement. “More people than ever are watching video online, and it’s being done across more devices at increasingly higher levels of quality.”

https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/23/trumps-inauguration-broke-live-video-streaming-records/

 

OK, so, are you sticking with this now obviously absurd claim?
In the same way you stubbornly stick with your belief that--
(1) The CGI is legit and will stay in business even when neither Clinton has an office to sell?; and
(2) That Hillary '08 was not the original source of the Birther claims?

 

Now I'm curious...is this the picture you are referencing?


I too was worried that the photo on the left was faked then I found NPR's time lapse version of Trump's inauguration. Notice that this is the apex.

 

I

It doesn't show the evening crowd. Trump's people work on the weekday. There's no way that was the apex. It's a moot point any way since it looks like Obama probably had more people. However, the media wasn't being honest comparing the two pictures.

 

The evening crowd? You think more people gathered in the evening after the inaugural address? I've tried to find contravening evidence but in this case the media was very honest. Trump, Spicer and Conway were the "confused" ones.

 

Crowd size, really? Who gives a sh*t? I also heard DT say he assembled the smartest cabinet in history.

The guy exaggerates and boasts all the time in inconsequential ways. I doubt there's a speech he made where he didn't claim something was the best ever.

He's been doing this for decades. I've seen old clips where he uses the same boasting terms as today as to how his results were the best ever done before.

That's the whole point of people's disgust with the MSM. They ignore all kinds of important actions to spend days slamming an inconsequential boast.

It was the same with Wiki...forget the proof of corruption and atrocities revealed in the emails, let's instead focus on who exposed them.

 

The media does.
Why?
They think they are making Trump look bad.
Look at all the things Trump has done just in the last couple days that they have ignored. All they care about is finding a gotcha moment.
It's going to be like this every day for at least the next 4 years.
Strap in

 

I think what's happening here is very interesting. If you like US politics, you should too. That is a lot of people who watched Trump's inauguration in non-standard ways. The numbers are difficult to quantify right now but the number is large.

Think about what is happening for a moment. There is a very large group of people now (mostly Americans now but a growing number of non-Americans) who just watch whatever news event they want to watch, completely bypassing the filter of the media-industrial complex in its entirety. This is part of what I was referring to above.

It's striking. The media is becoming less important by the day. The fun part is that not all of them fully realize this yet. Maybe the smart ones do, but how many of these people are smart? It is right in front of them, yet they still dont get it yet. It will be entertaining to watch as time goes forward as it dawns on them. But, more importantly, they are losing control. The liberal media filter of bias is being taken out of the equation.

The same was also true for the campaign itself. The media never caught on. People inside the Trump campaign saw it. They knew they had broader support than anyone among the media and pollsters did. But the GOP itself did not know (obviously). Nor did the Dems or their media. Just like the actual audience for the inauguration, this was in large part technology driven.

Here is Ted Cruz the day of the inauguration. He seems to get it. He calls it a new era.

 

And Trump. He mentioned it today in his meeting with Congressional leaders. He also brought up the point that he thinks he would have won the popular vote if not for 3-5 million illegal votes.

This guys ego will be his undoing. Y'all say it doesn't matter but clearly it drives his every thought, action and dialogue.

 

Trump said it was the largest crowd to ever watch an inauguration in person. Spicer compounded Trump's lie with additional lies about Metro ridership, ground covers, and metal detectors. So yes, I stand by my position.

If Trump had merely said that overall viewership of the inauguration was the biggest ever, and if Spicer had defended that by pointing to online viewership, there wouldn't be a issue.

 

You can't make this **** up. @Garmel can, but you can't.

 

Expanding the window by 12 hours isn't enough to support Trump's claim for the largest in-person audience ever. But if you tack on 12 more, you may get there.

 

If nobody showed up at the inaugural, would liberals still hold the lowest amount of Federal and State political offices than at any time since the 1920s?

 

They looked stupid and deserve all the criticism directed at them.

If they want to stand up to the media when they go off on their anti-Trump mission, I have no problem with that. They just have to make sure their facts are unimpeachable.

You can't ignore the whole and only point of reporting that MLK's bust was removed or comparing Trump's crowd size to that of the first African American President in history - to discredit Trump. If Trump's deeds, words, actions matter and move markets and opinions, so do the media's.

 

Here is what you actually wrote in the OP --

And, as I've shown here, it was actually the the largest audience to ever watch an inauguration

 

This has to be one of the most ridiculous political discussions I've seen in a while. Yes, of course the media wants to downplay the significance of Trump's inauguration as it compares to Obama's. They like Obama and played an indispensable role in his reelection, and they hate Trump's guts and did everything they could to make him lose. Accordingly, it wouldn't surprise me at all if some media figure(s) not only brought up the crowd size but perhaps even celebrated the point a little.

However, in the face of this, Trump sends his monkey boy out there to lecture the media with righteous indignation but does so with blatant falsehoods. He's called on them, and Trump supporters respond by regurgitating Kellyanne Conway's talking points - size doesn't matter, online viewership was big, the media sucks for reporting that MLK's bust was removed when it wasn't, etc.

It's comical, because if size really didn't matter, Trump wouldn't have been spending the last several months bragging about the size of his crowds and certainly, he wouldn't have sent his press secretary out to give a fiery speech on the topic. Hopefully this is the last time Trump shows his small penis issues rather than the first.

 

bypassing the media

 

Yes, I sort of regret lowering myself into this one

But I do still think the point about the yuge livestream crowd (which completely bypasses most of the biased media) was worth making. It's a big deal, a big picture item, that is going to produce rapid change

 

I hope Spicer will have more discipline than his boss in the future. The WH Press Secretary needs to help direct the public discourse to focus on important issues rather than arguing about dick measuring contests.

 

What the what? He put the press in their place so badly that it's now a meme making fun of people telling bold face lies. If I were to play to my audience with the meme it would be "Bob Stoops loves puppies" or "Barry Switzer is a prince of a man".

The analogy that he was a guy that came home mad about something and yelled at his kids for nothing was spot on.

 

It's a perfectly fair point to make. I think @texas_ex2000 also made an excellent point about who the respective candidates' supporters are and where they live. The inauguration takes place in Washington, D.C. - a city dominated by federal employees (most of whom probably had the day off of work), blacks, college students, and very wealthy white liberals. They were key parts of the Obama coalition and partisan Democrats. Hell, he could have drawn 200,000 just from DC - not the DC area, just DC. Throw in the surrounding metropolitan areas that are also overwhelmingly Democratic, and Obama had an enormous advantage in having a big inauguration crowd. Throw in other Democratic-dominated big cities that in the Acela Corridor that have cheap and easy access to DC, and the advantage is downright staggering.

By contrast, Trump supporters (especially the enthusiastic ones) don't live anywhere near DC, so for most of them, attending the inauguration would have required a big commitment of time and money that they probably didn't have. Furthermore, they don't usually have the kind of jobs where you can just take off anytime you want. Frankly, if he even got half of what Obama got in 2009, he did pretty well in my book.

He really has nothing to be ashamed of, but guys with small penis issues don't necessarily have small penises. They just feel inadequate, so they have to start a fight, even if it means BSing in the process.