There is a wide range of media outlets, which includes cable news, radio news, advertisements, Facebook, Twitter, magazines, newspapers, tabloids, and more. Some media outlets will be left-leaning, some will be right-leaning, and some will do everything in their power to remain neutral. Most likely, Trump means to attack left-wing cable news and maybe also The New York Times or The Washington Post. I doubt that any of these mainstream news outlets are actively trying to commit treason against America by influencing elections with fabricated information. A journalist's job is to report, while news pundits and newspaper editors will skew the language in order to represent a particular side of the debate. People see this liberal skew and call it "fake news", which is an over-exaggeration.
To be sure, The Washington Post, for example, has a liberal slant, but they are not reporting fabricated information:
There is a big difference between skewed language and fabricated facts. An example of a liberal skew is when The Washington Post publishes an article about how experts believe that the booming economy may not last forever (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business … f52717e293). An example of fake news is if, in theory, The Washington Post were to publish and article that pretends that the the bull market never existed in the first place. Your claim that the news does not report the bull market unsubstantiated. They do report that the economy is doing well, but they present the facts in a way that you may not like.
A liberal skew is when the Washington Post published an article that was skeptical of the fact that job growth under Trump was sustainable, while also suggesting that growth under Obama was also substantial (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pol … 13a6c3d74a). Fake news would be if we lived in a world where The Washington Post decided to publish an article that says jobs have gone down since Trump's election. Again, your claim that much of the media is not reporting how many jobs Trump has created is untrue. Everyone has reported it, but it is just reported slightly differently.
A liberal skew is when The Washington Post paints the theory about how George Soros funded the caravan as a conspiracy theory because the FBI never actually confirmed the theory to be true (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national … e355cada45). Fake news would be if the Washington Post falsely said the FBI had actually confirmed Soros's involvement in funding the caravan.
I can keep going. I can also do this with CNN and The New York Times. However, I think you get the point. The left-wing media does report the economy, the caravan, and more. They just offer a perspective with which you disagree. You are allowed to disagree, but the ability to disagree with something does not make it fake.
Additionally, all the newspapers have op-eds, which offer "unpopular opinions". These articles are skewed to support a viewpoint that the liberal editors do not necessarily like. Some of the op-eds are purposefully ridiculous and are published in order to cement the belief in viewers that conservatives are absurd. Other op-eds are actually thoughtful and can get people to accept that they may be wrong about some of their preconceived notions. No matter what type of op-ed you are reading, the existence of op-eds proves that anyone exposed to left-wing newspapers are forced to acknowledge that there is another way to skew the facts. Similarly, cable news networks will have expert panels that include both liberal and conservative commentators, indicating to viewers that there is an alternative way to interpret the facts.
Right-wing news sources will do the same thing. They will have a conservative slant, but op-eds and expert panels are used to show everyone that there is another side. Despite the right-wing slant of these news outlets, they are not actively trying to influence voters with "fake" facts. They are presenting facts in a certain way and hoping voters respond in a certain way. Liberal and conservative media both do the exact same thing. The only difference is that the liberal media seems more prominent and prevalent. Fox news, the one right-wing network, may be the most watched cable news network, but there are definitely more cable news networks that cater to the left. The same goes for newspapers, which are even more left-leaning than many cable news networks. The only really popular conservative newspaper is the Wall Street Journal, which is the likely most popular newspaper in the United States. However, by all counts, it is more moderate than it is right-wing these days.
However, conservative journalists, editors, and news anchors still exist in places such as Fox, WSJ, The Blaze, Breitbart, The Daily Caller, and others. These outlets report and interpret facts in ways ways that you probably like. According to Trump, Fox and the other conservative outlets (with the possible exception of Breitbart) probably are not "an enemy of the people", even though they are still part of "the media".
At the end of the day, the headlines are all the same, but the wording is going to be different, depending on how you choose to get your news. Trump chooses which parts of the media he attacks based on which members of the press are his enemies. However, even if CNN is an "enemy" of Donald Trump, they are not necessarily a treasonous "enemy of the people". They just report stories in a way that does not match Trump's brand. I am not going to deny that the media plays a role in elections, but the plenty of people get news from conservative platforms and these people may be swayed to vote in favor of Donald Trump. Are conservative platforms guilty of influencing elections? Is this type of influence utilizing news that should be considered "fake" just because I disagree with it? Trump certainly would not conservative news is "fake", which begs the question of who determines which type of news is "fake"? If all news is equally "fake", then what do you think is the best way to obtain information? If, as Trump believes, democrat news is more "fake" than republican news, then why is one type of news (ie CNN) more "fake" than another type of news (ie Fox)?
0
