MSNBC producer resigns from network with scathing letter: They block 'diversity of thought' and 'amplify fringe voices'

submitted by Tom_Bombadil from foxnews.com

all 18 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]hfxB0oyA 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Cracks are showing.

[–]magnora7 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Her name is Ariana Pekary! Seems like a name worth remembering and repeating, if she's willing to make a stand like this.

[–]lordNikon 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

https://nypost.com/2020/08/04/msnbc-producer-calls-network-a-cancer-after-quitting-job/

Something other than the trash that is Fox news psychosis entertainment reporting.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Have archives of both of them, for posterity.

Fox: https://archive.is/4pNL5

NYPost: https://archive.is/FCxvb

[–]GFIYTFUYDYTRDYESRESR 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

she is so wonderful. i am in love.

[–]GFIYTFUYDYTRDYESRESR 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

fox should give to her a sweet job offer, and they better give it to her on a silver platter.

[–]bagano1 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You clearly didn't read that story well. She is a hardcore lib. She would never dream of working for Fox.

[–]Soloninja 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Everything is starting to fall apart

[–]FediNetizen 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I mean, MSNBC is pretty open about their leftist bias. They're basically the Fox News of the left.

[–]Chipit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They breathlessly promoted the Russia conspiracy theory for years. Many of their viewers still aren't aware of the revelations. That's the power of media bias and persuasion.

[–]bagano1 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

MSNBC is MUCH worse. Fox would never cry like babies and make up conspiracy theories because their candidate lost.

[–]Chipit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well yeah. The whole movement is about destroying western culture entirely. They don't brook discussion or debate. It's like trying to use words to convince a zombie not to eat your brain. Of course you're not going to, and the zombie is a fool to listen.

[–]bagano1 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Actually, read the article well. I believe she was complaining that Trump is getting more attention than Biden because of ratings. In that, she wants Biden to get more attention even if Trump is getting negative attention.

She's NOT a good person.

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This is what she said on that:

This cancer risks our democracy, even in the middle of a presidential election. Any discussion about the election usually focuses on Donald Trump, not Joe Biden, a repeat offense from 2016 (Trump smothers out all other coverage).

Where's the problem there? In an election it makes sense to provide coverage of both candidates - not just focus on Trump to chase ratings. Even though MSNBC has been overwhelmingly negative on Trump, there's no arguing that they set aside coverage of Clinton and now Biden because they prefer to chase the ratings they get by shitting out a new article every time Trump so much as adds milk before first taking out the tea bag.

[–]noice 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They covered H. Clinton, portrayed her in a positive light pretty regularly in 2016. They're not covering Biden because every time he makes an appearance he fucks it all up, and they don't want to show that

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, they gave her good coverage, and they covered Trump way too much. It was all comical to them, and they were were going after Trump just like most of the other media outlets. The problem with that strategy is that Trump is rather good at dealing with accusations of wrongdoing and tends to come out better than he went in. It was really after the election that they properly ramped-up in to conspiracy theories and shameless activism. Clinton herself cited press coverage as one of the reasons she lost.

It's a very different election this time round. In 2016 it was a comical outsider who didn't stand a chance against heir to the throne Clinton. Part of it certainly is that Biden is not marketable, and arguably unfit for office, but that leads in to the main issue. The big problem is in how this election is essentially <insert candidate> versus Trump, so reporting is likely to continue going negative on Trump to the detriment of coverage that could give Biden more of a chance if he were aware of where he is at any given time. Biden is an amazingly terrible candidate, and you're right about it probably being best to avoid having him on too much. The media is probably going to focus on negative attacks on Trump and hope that people don't notice Biden in the background cheerfully urinating in a potted plant.

[–]Edge_Finder 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

wonderful