Alright so I know everyone here talks about CNN and the rest of the mainstream media as if it's controlled by Clinton, but what about Trump and his ties to Breitbart and the National Enquirer? As much as you talk about Clinton controlling the media, she has no tangible links, whereas Trump has appointed a Breitbart executive to directly oversee his campaign, and has used the national enquirer as a tool to attack his opponents (notably ted Cruz). So here we can see Trump having a clear media apparatus with which he is undeniably tied to, something that basically serves as a shamelessly pro trump and anti Clinton mouthpiece, and which he uses to smear campaign opponents, and then we have Clinton, who has no clear links to the media beyond accusative trump supporters. If you want to talk about media manipulation, there's nothing more clearly corrupt than Trumps association with Breitbart and the NE
Alright so I know everyone here talks about CNN and the rest of the mainstream media as if it's controlled by Clinton...
Bump
Babbies first election memers don't want people like you to disrupt their echochamber.
DELET THSI
>make thread relevant to politics
>get 1 reply
>make Sup Forums tier thread
>get 300 replies
MODS
?
look if the network covers scandals from both parties.
Breitbart and NE do. Others including Fox don't.
Sorry, forgot to mention that MSNBC was shown in the DNC email leaks to of been in collusion.
It is erroneous that Breitbart and Cnn/Fox/MSNBC have equal societal influence.
>MSNBC was shown in the DNC email leaks to of been in collusion.
Source? My point is that trump and breitbart/NE collaboration is just naked media manipulation. They don't even pretend to be anything other than trump mouthpieces. Its a travesty to journalism
Trump also has ties to Soros.
I honestly doubt you can get that close to political power without being bought
Sauce here.
>Https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/5508
Sorry for the delay, I was in another thread.
Trump has too much flak to be under control.
If he was bought it wouldn't look like this.
>It'd look like ted Cruz, a fake grassroots candidate
Breitbart has a lot of Trump on the front page. There's many sections to the site besides headlines. The headlines show what topics attract the most views, they are the juiciest fruit.
>>
who's the wanker with the curly hair? did mika anglo do this art sculpture?
>Breitbart and the NE
>mainstream
>implying people on here see kikebart as a credible source
user
>>implying people on here see kikebart as a credible source
But they do. I see it posted here all the time while anyone who posts a link from a mainstream news source is called a shill
You claim trump manipulated Breitbart to win us over.
Crazy.
Thank you for Correcting The Record. You are a great Huperson Being.
Is everything that isn't explicitly pro trump correcting the record?
Yesh
>leaked emails showing the biggest of big business media is in bed with Clinton
>OMG a professional media presence has connections with the tabloids
We need a range ban on leafs
lol the national enquirerer
yeah man that's totally the same as having MSNBC, CNN, and now FOX all following your orders
>oh no, 3 or 4 outlets don't run 50 "Drumpf is stumped" articles a day
I too am truly saddened. Breitbart has always been right-wing rags, just like HuffPost, Salon, Gawker, Buzzfeed etc. on the left-wing side.
>>OMG a professional media presence has connections with the tabloids
More like Trump has hired a media executive to directly oversee his campaign. Its shamelessly partisan of breitbart. Trump basically has his own ministry of propaganda.
Meanwhile there are some emails that show communication between the Clinton foundation and some news network or business that you wet yourselves over without any particular reason to do so. The emails show nothing at all. You're just blowing steam
Not just communication, also direct financial connections.
Trump hasn't released his tax returns. Clinton is not the only one with a spotty record by any means
>Clinton releases her returns which show that the entirety of what she gives to charity goes to her foundation that employs her husband and daughter. Not a peep from the mainstream media
>OMG Drumpf won't release his!!!
At least Clinton released hers. What is he hiding that makes him not want to release them?
Her deleted emails :^)
The thing Sup Forums is most-unwilling to admit?
There is no conspiracy. CNN isn't in cahoots with Clinton. No one with an education wants to see Trump in the white house. He is a threat to our security and our economy, and it's not because of some malicious conspiracy that everyone wants to stop him from winning. It's simple self-interest. Which is why the tabloids support the guy, by the by: their self interest is selling to the kinda conspiracy-nut retards who read tabloid magazines and, coincidentally, are the only ones dumb enough to think Trump is a good candidate.
See: Most news outlets are owned by the same media conglomerates, and there's a lot of nepotism just as there is on the other side on Fox News. Direct connections also exist as was proved by the wikileaks, and "self-interest" when you're only supposed to be reporting on facts is itself a bias and generally unwanted in an ideal world. Hillary is herself a threat to our security by keeping the same Kissinger-inspired policies in the Middle-East, antogonizing Russia, etc. and certainly to the economy since Democratic policies have led to one of the slowest economic recoveries for decades.
Clinton controls CNN ABSOLUTELY, and they openly have shilled for her for the last... what, three years? In addition, a lot of them do it for free, and they also applauded her in her fake staged press release.
Likewise with Breitbart Trump actually had to win them over with charm, they started off as anti Trump and pro Cruz.
So you got a grand total of one alt-media outlet Trump controls, and has only controlled fairly recently, versus everything, even FOX, shilling 4 Hill.
You also have to look at the people behind these rags. Rupert Murdoch of FOX and Ted Turner of CNN are absolute globalists, dedicated to the destruction of not this country but of all countries, and Ted Turner said its good that US troops commit suicide.
Fox isn't shilling for Hill, a lot of them like O'Reilly, Hannity, etc. are constantly defending him.
>Clinton controls CNN
>and lots of them do it for free
That's a bit of a contradiction, Clinton doesn't need to control them, they genuinely believe that what they are doing is right, which makes them more dangerous, cause they believe their own shit. It's like Donald Trump doesn't have to control Sup Forums we will shill for him for free, because we know it's for the best.
I won't rule out Clinton communicating with the media through backdoor channels and affecting the narrative, but it's best to understand that she doesn't have too.
The media bias against the REPs is pretty obvious to anyone. The vast majority of journalists are "progressives".
"A lot of them do it for free" refers to MSNBC etc.
Also I don't particularly get the point of this thread. Do people actually think Hillary is puppetmaster supreme when they talk about her? Is it likely someone who is dying would, wholly of their own volition, work themselves to death rather than enjoy their cool millions of Clinton Cash? I don't think so. She's more like an operative.
Conventional presidents have very little free will or agenda of their own; they're just fed what to say. HRC moreso, as everything she does is extensively focus tested and she probably barely knows where she is outside of scripted events.
She, like Bush and Obama, are just operatives. When someone talks about Obummer doing xyz, they probably mean Obummer, his campaign, and his administration. Same with Clinton, if she gets an administration.