Trump’s war on the mass media helps maintain Moore in play

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air flow Force A single on Nov. 11. | Andrew Harnik/AP Image Trump’s war on the mass media helps maintain Moore in play Two years of attacks on “artificial news” media supply the Alabama candidate a technique for countering misuse allegations.

Donald Trump is trying to keep his alternatives open on Roy Moore, but the president has already helped him in a single significant way: His two-year plan against the mainstream media – in cases like this The Washington Post – appears to be the key to Moore’s survival strategy.

Lately, a story that quoted four ladies by name and at length, with some relatives and buddies members corroborating aspects of their accounts, could have been taken at face value. However now, in Moore’s informing, the Post, which released the allegations on Thursday, is participating in its own crusade to operate a vehicle him out of the race.

Story Continued Below

The portrayal of a mainstream media outlet as a political actor – not simply reflecting a liberal bias in choosing stories but actually promoting “fake news flash” – draws heavily on Trump, according to journalism observers.

“It does seem to be it’s a approach out of the Trump playbook, both with regards to attacking the media and responding forcefully to allegations which may have been made,” said Tim Franklin, a senior associate dean and professor at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism. “They’re also using the same dialect in a lot of techniques. In his speech on Saturday, Roy Moore called it ‘fake reports,’ which is among the president’s familiar refrains.”

Former top-Trump advisor Steve Bannon famously described the media as “the opposition get together,” and as Trump has hammered away over the last two years, both as prospect and president, he does seem to be to have effectively politicized the press-and occasionally, facts themselves.

Morning Media Your guide to the mass media circus – weekday mornings, in your inbox. Email SUBSCRIBE By registering you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe anytime.

A POLITICO/Morning Consult poll from previous month found that practically half of voters, 46 percent, think that the media accocunts for news stories about Trump and his administration. But how respondents answered that query depended heavily on the political affiliation: 76 percent of Republicans stated the mass media fabricates stories, compared to simply a fifth of Democrats.

And so, simply just as surely as some persons Republicans in Alabama might swear off Moore, reporters also have tracked down case in point after example of folks who claim they don’t believe the Washington Post. All of those accounts will be anecdotal, of study course, and the true impression of the accuser’s allegations won’t be regarded until election day, December 12.

“It’s tougher for an average Alabamian to believe the Washington Post than it is to believe the Gadsden Times or perhaps the Birmingham Media,” stated Chris Roberts, a professor at the University of Alabama’s university of journalism who worked for practically two decades as a reporter in the condition.

“I research credibility,” he continued, “Persons tend to believe local persons more than they tend to believe outsiders, particularly in a much more politicized debate in what real truth is or whether real truth matters, depending on what your political beliefs are . . .I believe it coming from the Washington Post helps it be better to dismiss.”

Roberts lamented how shrinking local news resources managed to get less likely an Alabama news wall plug could have gotten the report. The increasing nationalization of the press, combined with increasing partisanship, likely paved the way for Moore’s defense.

At a Veterans Day appearance on Saturday, Moore denied the claims in the Post story, stating, “This article is a prime exemplory case of fake news. An effort to divert attention from the true problems that affect the country, like health care, military readiness, taxes reform or national personal debt.”

In another political appearance on Sunday, he threatened to sue the Post.

“The Washington Post published another attack on my character and reputation because they’re desperate to stop my political campaign. These episodes stated I was with a minor child and are fake and untrue — and that they’ll be sued,” he said.

His approach of fighting back again by attacking the press may well not have worked as well in the pre-Trump period, Franklin, the Northwestern University professor, said.

“I believe it’s becoming more possible today than it ever has been, as a result of how partisan it is, as a result of the echo chamber effect and the filter bubble society that we increasingly live in,” stated Franklin, the former major editor of The Baltimore Sun, among other papers.

But not all Republicans are persuaded by Moore’s denials and efforts at fault the Post. Senate Bulk Head Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) manufactured no reference to the Post in basically declaring that he believes the ladies who are making accusations against Moore. A great many other mainstream Republicans, who weren’t totally sold on Moore in the first place, have signaled their problems about the allegations, as well.

The Post reporters who wrote the original story on Moore’s accusers seemed to anticipate the kind of blowback that Moore has engaged in-and visited great pains to inoculate their story against any criticism. The reporters explained in the article how they started working on the report, their methodology, and how they approached each of the women who accused Moore of wrongdoing.

Bill Grueskin, a Columbia School of Journalism professor who previously served as one of the Wall Road Journal’s top editors, said he couldn’t recall a story that had so carefully explained how it came to be and bullet-proofed itself. It’s just like the reporters had “this checklist of how persons tried out to disparage or diminish a story in regards to a politician,” Grueskin stated, and “checked off each one to be sure it wouldn’t apply in cases like this.”

“It’s a brilliant maneuver and it’s something I would want to teach here at Columbia Journalism School,” Grueskin said. “The Republican political establishment that you’ll expect to arrive to Moore’s protection has been basically left open mouth area. They don’t have the sort of tools within their toolbox they would normally use to diminish a story such as this.”

What’s different right now, though, is usually that there’s a bulwark outside of the traditional Republican Party burning Moore. Even as the establishment Republicans have abandoned Moore, the Breitbart Media and its innovator, Bannon, have doubled straight down on him, attacking the Post’s credibility.

From the jump, Breitbart has sought to discredit the Post, publishing a story with Moore’s denial prior to the Post even put out its original story. Its headlines have got focused about how the Post’s editorial page-which is usually unrelated to its reports coverage-endorsed Moore’s opponent. On Friday, the website published a story headlined, “EXCLUSIVE – Mother of Roy Moore Accuser: Washington Post Reporters Convinced My Girl to Go Public.”

Persuading a reference to go on the record is usually a typical journalistic practice. The Post had explained how it did just that in its report, but Breitbart portrays the reporters as participating in “activist behavior.”

Over the weekend, Axios reported that Breitbart was sending two reporters to Alabama to try and further discredit the Post. And Bannon explicitly tied the Post’s reporting on Trump to its reporting on Moore. “The Bezos-Amazon-Washington Post that dropped that dime on Donald Trump is the same Bezos-Amazon-Washington Post that dropped the dime this afternoon on Judge Roy Moore,” Bannon stated Thursday at a fund-raiser in New Hampshire.

Therefore, Moore fights on, even as another woman accused him of sexual assault in a press meeting today.

“It is sort of hard to believe,” Grueskin said. “You’d believe most people who will be in this location would drop out the very next day.”

Read more on: http://www.politico.com