Mediaboss Marketing

5498047

The legacy media had an unfortunate incident when Mika Brzezinski of MSNBCs Morning Joe lamented Trump was influencing what people think and that controlling what people think is our job. This admission is a surprising revelation from what is largely a coordination propaganda machine that pretends that other sources of information are fake news and that they are impartial and unbiased.

The statement is in part an ongoing reaction of legacy medias view of President Trumps dynamic news conference from last week. Unlike the days of old, legacy media no longer can decide what the news of the day is or is not. Setting the narrative (or themes and talking points) is what they have done for decades. Now when they try to do it they are no longer successful and cannot yet fathom how this has happened.

Primarily they havent noticed that fewer people still trust legacy media and now get information from other sources. They themselves tend to sneer and dismiss other sources such as Fox (or faux News) and not take them seriously. Because of that they are blind to the shift in public trust. You would think that the steady decline in market share and rock bottom credibility ranking with the general public would be a hint but no, they cannot accept that it is a new reality.

The legacy media continues to ignore that internet, radio and other news sources are available and the public can get that information without them setting the narrative. You can check and see what an opposing side is saying and decide for yourself. Or you have someone like Trump who takes them head on and speaks over them to the audience. Thats what happened in the 2016 election. Trump got his message out over the GOP establishment and legacy media to the voters despite the constant efforts to smear, defame and poison the information so that he would not be elected. Legacy media provided Hillary debate questions in advance. When Donald Trump claimed it was rigged and crooked, he was right. Worse for the legacy media was that the public could see it. The conclusion of legacy media is that Russians and the FBI rigged the election not that they no longer controlled what the voters think.

In the past legacy media would have just talked over Trump and ensured that at the end of the day that their version of reality would be thats the way it is even if it wasnt. Not any longer.

Breitbart is a great example of a news organization that doggedly attacked legacy media and took great pains to explain what was not being said by them and how they were biased. It is not a surprise that Steve Bannon ended up at the White House with Trump, he was a large force at Breitbart steering the ship and was effective at countering the lefts template and talking points.

Donald Trump sensed the shift and now has the legacy media in turmoil, one might even say chaos. They have no idea what to do and why their usual methods of destruction arent working. Trump is still standing and their desperate dreams of seeing him do a Richard Nixon wave as he boards a helicopter after resigning are a perfect example of just how disconnected they have become from the new political landscape.

It will be interesting to see if Trumps humor and intellect will sway any in the media, it seemed to have something of an effect on many of the reporters. Then again the anger has unhinged certain people to the point where they publicly admit that they arent reporting the news but are attempting to control the voters. The pretense of fairness is shredded and legacy media still refuses to understand that the landscape has changed. The balance has shifted and that they, quite simply, no longer have control.

Follow this link:
Legacy Media Loses Control - Daily Caller

The state announced Tuesday (Feb. 21)a new head for the office in charge of regulating alcohol and marijuana.

Listen now

Erika McConnell has worked in Anchorages municipal planning department for more than a decade. More recently, she wrote the citys regulations for commercial cannabis businesses.

McConnells new job as director of the Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office falls under the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development. Commissioner Chris Hladick said her expertise on local regulation makes McConnell an asset for state administration.

Shes well positioned to take on management and regulatory duties of this position, Hladick said. She was the marijuana coordinator a while for the city, and I think that speeds up her on-boarding process as she learns the states regulatory structure.

The AMCO director has a lot of influence shaping the state governments role in Alaskas new cannabis industry. McConnell will have a say in controversial issues like on-site consumption and the legality of certain concentrated oils.

Though many of the rules regulating marijuana businesses are already written, the implementation of those rules has raised numerous issues that McConnell will have to weigh in on. That includes decisions *about* controversial measures that are still in limbo, like whether or not to allow on-site consumption and legal disputes over certain concentrated oils.

Shortly after news of the appointment, opinions from industry members were mixed.

Bruce Schulte is the former chair of the marijuana control board, and has reservations over whether McConnells background will align with industry needs.

It is a fact that Anchorage has been one of the most difficult communitiesreally the most difficult community for any of these businesses to get established, Schulte said. And Erikas been very key in that process, so I hope that we dont see any more complication extend state-wide like what weve seen in Anchorage.

Schulte frequently disagreed about policy decisions made by the last head of AMCO, Cynthia Franklin, before he was dismissed from his position by Governor Walker. Schulte said he hopes that McConnell will bring a broader perspective to the office, which hes criticized for being too top-down in the rule-making process.

I would hope that wed see a friendlier interaction with the cannabis industry, and an AMCO office thats there to help them succeed rather than throw yet more obstacles in their way, Schulte said.

Others found the appointment more encouraging. Attorney Jana Weltzin represents several cannabis businesses in Alaska, and says, in her dealings, shes found McConnell to be tough but fair. Weltzin added, shes going to be hard on both sides which is how it should be.

McConnell takes over as AMCO director on March 30th.

Continued here:
Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office hires new director - Alaska Public Radio Network

On November 8th, I tweeted, If the media thought that the relationship with#donaldtrumpwashostileduring the campaign...its going to be like that on steroids in the White House.

In the first month of the Donald TrumpDonald TrumpHow Democrats can rebuild a winning, multiracial coalition The Green Movement Is our planets last best hope Poll: Majority of Americans fear US will become involved in another major war MORE presidency, the president and his top advisors have told the media to keep its mouth shut, dubbed it the opposition party, and characterized it as fake news.

In short, everything is going exactly to script.

Anybody who was delusional enough to believe that upon assuming the presidency, Trump would somehow mature, evolve and adapt, can now see how laughably off base that pipe dream really was.

This of course is all by design.

Trump and his chief strategist Steve Bannon believe that they are at their best when they have someone to fight and when everyone else around them is in chaos.

In the campaign, they had the luxury of 16 other Republican primary candidates to play-off of. In the general election, they had both the legacy of President Barack ObamaBarack ObamaHow Democrats can rebuild a winning, multiracial coalition Howard Dean endorses Buttigieg in DNC race Americans should get used to pop culture blending with politics MORE and Secretary Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonFederal judge denies watchdog's request to disclose State Dept. records on Clintons emails How Democrats can rebuild a winning, multiracial coalition Howard Dean endorses Buttigieg in DNC race MORE to serve as their foils.

Now they need another boogeyman to effectively run against and the media is the perfect target.

This serves a dual purpose.

Whatever failings they have theyll convince their base of supporters that the media is manipulating the story with alternative facts and point them to platforms they control that show the president in a distortedly positive light.

At the same time, as media outlets begin to beef-up investigative units, Trumps cronies will actively try totear down all external pillars of accountabilityto insulate the President and control the flow of information that reaches him.

so essentially @POTUS is upset that the truth came out and #flynn got caught lying and its really unfair #fakemedia exposed him

Should the Washington Post investigative unit publish a story they dont like, Bannon and friends will march into the Oval Office and tell the president, well of course they wrote that, theyre the opposition, theyre the enemy, dont listen to them, listen to us.

Should the Bureau of Labor Statistics have unemployment and job numbers that reflect poorly on the Trump Administration, Trumps cadre of advisors will tell him the government bureaucrats are using fuzzy math and order them to submit all reports to the White House for review and approval, before releasing publicly.

Its a way to inoculate themselves from being held accountableby the president and also to continue to narrow who the president listens to and where he gets his information.

For all of the talk about alternative facts, the Trump White House is creating its own alternate reality.

The White House believes they are in the position of strength and can do whatever they want. They dont need to answer any questions from anyone. They can and will stack the deck of every public engagement with favorable reporters and avoid being held accountable.

They are banking on the idea that whether you like them or hate them, whether they call you names and question your motives, whether they straight up lie to you, that the media will cover a Trump tweet with mass saturation.

Think about it. The very people who are so critical of the media are also hungry, thirsty and obsessed for their approval, acceptance and their coverage.

The worst thing you could do in the Trump-Bannon lexicon is to not talk about them at all.

Obviously, thats not practical, but thats how theyre playing it.

Whether the media accepts it or not, they are in a war.

#WH strategy is to not respond to reporters before a story is published so they can say it's false after it runs and call it media bias

Historically, political leaders in power who have this kind of open contempt for the free press end up utilizing extreme means to try and silence/suppress it.

Imagine if the next time the president refuses to answer a straightforward question or attacks a media outlet at a press conference, if every reporter after that, asks the same question or defers their time to the reporter who was attacked.

Imagine if the next time the president tweets something, rather than saturating the airwaves with panel after panel talking about it, an anchor simply reads it once and nothing else is said about it ever again.

Imagine if the next time the president uses the free press as props to hold another Trump infomercial, the press doesnt break in live and instead runs news stories about real people spotlighting how policies in Washington are impacting them on a day-to-day level.

I have always believed that the medias true power lies in its ability to reach and shape public perception. One of the fundamental tenets that our nation was built upon is the ability to have a free and interactive press that can tell truth to power and fight for answers to questions that need to be asked on behalf of the American people.

I dont believe that the media was ever looking for this fight, but like it or not, they are now in it and they are losing. Good, bad, ugly, if the conversation is all about Donald Trump, Team Trump believes they are winning.

Maybe part of the solution is to spend less time talking Trump and more time spotlighting the human cost of Trumps policies.

@KurtBardella is a media consultant in Washington D.C. that has represented Breitbart News, the Daily Caller, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the House Oversight and Reform Committee and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill

Excerpt from:
Yes, it's war: How the media should fight back against Trump - The Hill (blog)

Legislative History

America has a long and dialectical history when it comes to gun rights. The Second Amendment to the Constitution pronounces, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Held as a protective measure against tyranny, the right to own guns was enshrined in the Constitution after the American Revolution. As guns and society have evolved over the last two hundred years, however, the United States has had to adapt its treatment of firearms. The early 20th century saw a rise in gun crime, with mob violence and tommy guns bringing firearms to national attention. To combat this rising crime wave, Franklin Delano Roosevelt enacted the first restrictive federal gun legislation in 1934, establishing machine gun taxes and beginning the first registry of sales. After a slew of high-profile assassinations in the 1960s, such as the Kennedy brothers deaths and the murder of Martin Luther King Jr., Lyndon B. Johnson pursued enhanced gun control legislation. His Gun Control Act of 1968 was the foremost federal firearm regulation of its time, placing ownership restrictions on convicted criminals, mentally ill individuals, and more.

Each step forward in gun control legislation tends to produce retaliatory pushback. Congress reacted to Johnsons restraints in the 1980s, enacting legislation to limit the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms powers. However, tighter restrictions on machine guns were also passed at that time, which remain in effect to this day. The 1990s brought renewed action on restricting access. Although barred from creating a federal registry of ownership, The Brady Act of 1993 established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NCIS) to help prevent unlawful sales. Shortly thereafter, Congress passed a 10-year federal ban on semi-automatic weapons. Yet, by the early 2000s, restrictions on federal gun sale data were passed and efforts to reauthorize the semi-automatic ban failed. Gun manufacturers were also granted immunity from civil lawsuits on gun crime, and in 2008 District of Columbia vs. Heller ruled that individuals can own guns for personal use. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling for state and local jurisdictions as well, overturning several city-wide handgun bans. Today, gun laws range from state to state, while meaningful federal action has failed to respond to a growing number of mass shootings.

Gun Violence in the United States

On average, the United States experiences about 33,000 gun deaths per year, approximately 12,000 of which are homicides. Over 50% of these homicides are young men, two thirds of whom are black. Of particular interest when it comes to media coverage, however, are mass shootings. In 2016 alone, there were 385[1] total mass shootings, defined here as four or more people shot in a single event. Furthermore, the number of mass shootings in America has risen significantly in recent years; between 1982 and 2012, the country experienced fewer than 200 reported mass shootings. To put this in context, the United States has about 5% of the worlds population, but represents 31% of all mass shootings between 2000 and 2012. The United States also has the highest rate of gun ownership per capita, with about 89 firearms per 100 people. Clearly, the United States has a problem, a problem that is linked to its widespread availability of guns, as well as a myriad of cultural and political factors.

High profile mass shootings have dominated news coverage in recent years. The Sandy Hook massacre is particularly important to more recent debates on gun control, when outrage sparked after twenty children and six adults were murdered in 2012. The San Bernardino shooting, during which two shooters killed fourteen people in 2015, recently brought gun control back into the national eye after the Sandy Hook killings. The 2016 Orlando shooting, when a gunman murdered forty-nine people at Pulse nightclub, remains the deadliest shooting to date. These murders, along with hundreds of other mass shootings, necessitate a national debate on rights and safety.

The Gun Control Debate

Currently, the American gun control dispute is polarized, and tends to separate along party lines. Gun control advocates point to the statistics, arguing that too many Americans are killed each year in gun-related incidents, and restricting access to firearms could reduce these numbers. The central argument states that the average person should not be able to use semi-automatic or assault weapons, and sensible restrictions can save lives. Most gun control advocates are not aiming to take away everyones guns, especially not from law abiding citizens, but aspire to create a more efficient system to keep guns out of dangerous hands. The data to support the efficacy of these policies is inconclusive, however.

On the other hand, opponents of gun control argue that firearm ownership is a matter of individual freedom. Pointing to the Second Amendment, they assert that individual rights to bear arms are protected by the Constitution, and more recently by Supreme Court legislation. An armed population is safer from crime and victimization, and armed citizens can even stop a mass shooter, they argue. Similarly, data on whether or not guns make the population safer from attack, or help prevent mass shootings, is incomplete. One reason there is so much uncertainty around the efficacy of gun control legislation is that Congress has essentially banned gun research by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention by prohibiting studies that could promote gun control, and refusing to appropriate funds even after President Obamas executive order for gun research.

Public opinion is generally split between the two camps. Pew Research Center finds that the gap between supporting gun control versus gun ownership, historically favoring control by wider margins, has converged. As of August 2016, 52% of the American public now supports gun rights over control, versus 46% supporting control. However, measures like background checks and expanded restrictions for people already on federal watch lists enjoy broader public support, while the American people remain divided when it comes to banning specific weapons and munitions.

Overall, Americas relationship with firearms is complicated, with a long history of changing public opinion and dialectic legislative controls. However, high numbers of gun deaths and rising incidents of mass shootings necessitate a more immediate conversation and a closer look at how we treat firearm.

[1] This number is debated according to different definitions of mass shooting. Mass Shooting Tracker puts this number at 476 mass shootings and 604 dead in 2016, using a slightly more inclusive definition of a single outburst of violence in which four or more people are shot.

Read more from the original source:
Georgetown Public Policy Review / The American Media's Impact on ... - Georgetown Public Policy Review

Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 18:03 Updated: Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 07:26

US president Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House in Washington, DC. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

US president Donald Trump confirmed his intention to unveil new measures on immigration next week, as he lashed out at the out of control media in an impromptu press conference at the White House.

In a rambling address that lasted more than one hour and fifteen minutes, Mr Trump jumped from topic to topic, criticising a number of media channels for their low audience ratings and highlighting his victory in the election.

Noting that 80 per cent of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decisions are overturned, Mr Trump criticised last weeks decision by an appeals court to uphold a temporary ban on his executive order restricting travel into the US from seven Muslim-majority nations and suspending the USs refugee resettlement programme.

He pledged to announce a new order which would be very much tailored to what I consider to be a very bad decision.

The press conference, which was scheduled an hour in advance, was ostensibly organised to announce Mr Trumps new nominee for US labour secretary, R Alexander Acosta, following Andrew Puzders withdrawal from the nomination process on Wednesday.

However, Mr Trump, who appeared on his own without press advisers or officials, used the opportunity to lambast the media several times, singling out the failing New York Times in particular for criticism.

He said that he had inherited a mess at the White House and accused the media of carrying biased stories about his presidency, arguing that no one believes the media anymore.

I turn on the TV, open the newspapers and I see stories of chaos - chaos, he said.

Yet it is the exact opposite. This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine, despite the fact that I cant get my cabinet approved.

The press has become so dishonest that if we dont talk about it we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people, he said, adding: The press are out of control. The level of dishonesty is out of control.

Mr Trump, who took questions from numerous reporters, denied claims that he has close ties to Russia, saying: I have nothing to do with Russia.

Asked if members of his administration had frequent contact with Russian intelligence officials, as claimed in media reports earlier this week, Mr Trump replied: Nobody that I know of.

He also repeated his belief that former national security adviser Michael Flynn, whom he fired on Monday night, was a fine man, clarifying that he had dismissed Mr Flynn because he had misrepresented his conversation with the Russian ambassador to vice-president Mike Pence.

The press conference came as restaurants and other businesses across the US shut their doors and thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in its cities in a walkout aimed at protesting Mr Trumps immigration policies.

Activists called on immigrants to stay home from work, avoid shopping and skip classes in A Day Without Immigrants, in an effort to highlight the vital role they play in American society.

Nominee heckled

Earlier, Mr Trumps nominee to become the next US ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, was heckled in the Senate during his confirmation hearing.

Mr Freidman, the son of an Orthodox Rabbi who is in favour of Israeli settlements, apologised for his previous incendiary comments, including his criticism of liberal American Jews. Five former US ambassadors to Israel have written to the Senate urging senators to reject Mr Trumps nominee, saying that he holds extreme, radical positions on issues such as Jewish settlements and the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Nonetheless, Mr Friedman is expected to be passed in the Senate, where Republicans have a majority.

As controversy continued over the Trump administrations links with Russia, US defence secretary James Mattis appeared to play down any suggestion of closer military ties between Washington and Moscow following a meeting at Nato headquarters in Brussels.

We are not in a position right now to collaborate on a military level. But our political leaders will engage and try to find common ground, he said.

He also said he accepted that Russia had interfered in democratic elections.

Asked about Russian interference in the US presidential elections, Mr Mattis said: Right now, I would just say theres very little doubt that they have either interfered or they have attempted to interfere in a number of elections in the democracies.

Additional reporting: Reuters

Visit link:
Trump attacks 'out of control' media in rambling address - Irish Times