VehiclesFashionRecipesBlogsHuntTravelsSportFunHandmadeITEducation
Mini-Games
x

x
zakruti.com » Blogs and People » Philip DeFranco
Why The Trump White House Cancelled Must-See TV.

Why The Trump White House Cancelled Must-See TV.

FBTwitterReddit

video description

Rating: 4.0; Vote: 1
Why The Trump White House Cancelled Must-See TV. Night Stick: I think it's a terrible idea to get rid of press briefings, and I absolutely, without a doubt, think that Trump is making this move to hide and be less transparent. I think that's the ONLY conclusion you can possibly come to. There might be other benefits in doing so, but without a shadow of a doubt Trump is trying to end press briefings to hide. Trump doesn't like big or hard questions, there's evidence of that everywhere, it's just a fact. I can understand why, I don't think any sane person likes big and hard questions when you know people are going to scrutinize and criticize you for whatever you say. It's especially true when you're someone as truly, abysmally horrific at speaking. The man can barely speak in complete sentences on the absolute best of days, and is generally just rambling on in a mumble-ish tone until he feels he's thrown up words for long enough. He is not an eloquent speaker in ANY way shape or form. He can stir up a crowd, and is quite good at manipulating emotions in a rally setting - but he makes that super shy and awkward kid in high school who has to do a presentation and fumbles all his words and isn't even the least bit prepared, who looks like he might feint and pee himself at the same time look like he's the god of public speaking. Trump can't even form a complete sentence, much less deliver a whole speech. Trump gives preferential treatment to people who cover him in a positive light, it's human nature to like being praised, he just takes that a step further and won't give anyone who says anything even a little negative about him a single second unless he's forced to. If he ended press briefings all you'd hear is Trump on Fox where they ask him the easiest of questions and only look at his positives, or Trump himself on twitter. Places that are actually critical of him wouldn't ever get a chance to question this administration.
Date: 2019-11-01

Comments and reviews: 9


At point 5: 35 you point out the amount of interviews by the press and the President and state that Trump have preferential treatment to Fox News, but for comparison you didn't state the same for Obama. I wonder why? Is it because Obama also snubbed Fox News a lot? If you want to do a comparison go ahead, but please don't leave out the obvious which is, I'm going to ask for comparison, did Obama snubbed, or not snubbed the news media he did not like? Philip please be more careful when providing data. When you provide one, but not the other, it becomes misleading and sounds like you are trying to position yourself on one side of the issue. I can understand when we talk about vaccines that for the most part, unless someone is allergic to a medication, they should be vaccinated, but we are not talking about vaccines here.
reply

I think the Trump administration, and all future administrations should stay off of Twitter for an information delivery platform. I know it to be true that Twitter rewards impulsivity, and not well-thought out responses like press briefings do. I also think that the most radical and ideological people will populate Twitter first and foremost. It may seem like a representative group, to look at Twitter, but I can assure you it isn't. There are probably only between 15 and 30 million people who actually care about politics in the US. That may even seem like a representative group, except that so much disinformation going around can lead to people not see the full picture. I also agree with that woman at the end of the video. I do think it's better for political discourse to stay professional.
reply

The data you provided proves it is not because the press harasses the press secretary in excess. Its not because any other alternative is a better substitute FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, as any other substitute thus far only serves to allow the administration to obfuscate further. And the nail in the coffin of proof here is the recent exposing of Sarah Sanders blatant lies to the press (which are the REASON for any heated exchanges, thus its not grand standing by the press) from the Mueller report where she admits that there was no basis for her claim that she personally received countless comments from rank and file FBI that they lost faith in Comey. This is hiding because theyre getting called on their blatant and excessive lies.
reply

I can't believe this is even a question. No, we should not get rid of press briefings. She sounds like an idiot when she says, The press can question him directly (through twitter) How many of that press does he ignore? Or have blocked? A press briefing is a place where you have to show if you are willing to answer a question at all. Not to mention twitter has no context. It's way easier to lie. This administration is a joke that wants to run like a dictatorship. And I don't know if it will be one more year or five but I can not wait for the day that we are not represented by people who think the public is so dumb that they can say and do some of the dumb shit they do and then wonder why people don't like it.
reply

I don't see the press briefings as an opportunity for openness and transparency, it's about accountability. The press briefings afford the opportunity for the White House and the President to be held accountable for their decisions and answer tough questions. They allow the people to have an on-record official response from the Administration regarding their policies, actions and positions. And I feel that's what they are trying to move away from. I think the media do get confrontational with Sarah Sanders, but that is down to them trying to get a straight and definitive answer out of her/ the administration, and many of the briefings became about deflecting, back-tracking and non-comital answers.
reply

I feel it's a mixed bag leaning more towards the reporters side, on one hand they are a bit contentious but also since the administration has released a bunch of false or misleading information it makes sense that reporters would be a bit more aggressive in there questioning. Also Trump is not fairly distributing his interviews and also the administration has acted hostilely towards press that isn't heavily right leaning so overall I side with the reporter. Even though he posts on Twitter a lot it's not like he answers questions via that platform, so it feels more like a way to distance himself from being questioned than an attempted at being reachable.
reply

Let me break it down for you guys, Sarah Huckabee Sanders probably had a nervous breakdown and her shrink probably demanded that she go on hiatus. Being Press Secretary is hard on any person regardless of who the President is, its the nature of the job. I dont think the press is that different towards Sanders than they have been to any other Press Secretary. But keeping up with the hourly lies, nonsense and turnarounds by Trump must be a nightmare to navigate. Since Trump made it nice and simple by declaring that the Press was the enemy he pretty much dictated the reason for stopping/slowing down because he doesnt feel the need to be responsive to the Press.
reply

If we move to Twitter as the delivery, they need to take it fully away from Trump. You can read the official statements and tell Trump was not the author. Sanders would have to be fired because if they knockout the transparent briefings where questions can actually be asked where it is clear when those questions are intentionally being ignored rather than just the massive number of responses from the public drowning each other out. There is no way Twitter will be, during this administration, the best delivery method. It's already questionable as to why she is still there since she is underutilized in her job.
reply

The Trump white house doesn't seem like a place where a lot of consensus is needed. Trump runs things like a CEO that may only ask the board their opinion as a courtesy. He treats the press and the internet the same way. And to be honest, the press used to only give their opinions in the editorial section and biases weren't supposed to matter. The press was only there to inform people, not be agents trying to force change. Now opinions are everywhere, like seagulls at the beach. 1 or 2 is fine and is just part of the usual scenery, but get 50+ all feeding on something and you'll want to shoot them.
reply
Add a review, comment






Other channel videos