Gretchen A. Peck’s Post

Is the press failing in its responsibilities? “The media is still pursuing the appearance of fairness by treating true and false, normal and outrageous, as equally valid… Most voters… have no clue what a second Trump term would actually be like. Instead, we get the same insipid focus on the horse race and the polls, while normalizing abnormal behavior and treating this like a typical presidential election, not one that is an existential threat to democracy.” #elections #press #media #newsagencies #elections2024 #republicans #independents #democrats Christopher Holtz

📰 Kamala Harris: Media's New Narrative for 2024? 🗳️ As we approach the 2024 elections, it seems the media is giving Vice President Kamala Harris a fresh start. But what’s behind this sudden shift? Liberty Nation takes a deep dive into the strategic reintroduction of Harris, exploring the motives, the messaging, and what it could mean for the upcoming election. 🚨 Is this a genuine reevaluation or just political spin? Find out in this must-read analysis. 👉 Read the full article: https://bit.ly/3SPXJIZ #KamalaHarris #2024Elections #MediaNarratives #LibertyNation #Politics

As the U.K. General Elections concluded last week, there was much 'buzz' surrounding the Labour and Conservative Parties. In particular, surrounding Sir Keir Starmer's 'supermajority', and its effects in the media. Read this article I collaborated with to learn more about how the Conservative Party coined this term, and how it affected an entire election campaign. https://lnkd.in/gceQM_V9 #UKElections #Government #Journalism #UKPolitics

Unpopular opinion alert - I don't think newspapers should be endorsing candidates. Jeff Bezos screwed up here by not making that decision until the last minute, keeping his staff out of the loop, and pulling the rug out from under them. All strategic mistakes. But I don't think the Washington Post or anyone else should be getting behind candidates at any level. We are currently living through a massive information crisis. Lies and rumors are running rampant on social media. The only tool that I know of that can heal that and bring people back together is local news. The old idea about readers being aware of a wall separating editorial and opinion is gone. People see something coming from The Washington Post and they view it, perhaps correctly, as being on behalf of an organization. If your paper endorses Kamala Harris, it will color all of your reporting about Donald Trump before, during, and after the election. The same is true at a local level. The stakes of this election are incredibly high. But the days, weeks, and months after matter too. Whether you like it or not, millions of people will vote for both candidates, and we can't have a functioning information ecosystem when people believe major news institutions are on or against their side, with nothing in between. Having trusted messengers that people, no matter who they vote for, can turn to for accurate information is essential. And news organizations throwing their weight behind a candidate is a dated practice that should die. Information, trust, and credibility are too important, and I'm hoping more news organizations take that mission seriously in the elections to come. Cancelling your Washington Post subscription won't hurt Jeff Bezos, he's too rich to notice. But it will definitely hurt the Washington Post, its readers, and the journalists that are doing their best to uncover government corruption, who is pulling the strings in our elections, and what our elected officials are up to. https://lnkd.in/gK8Em5P7

✦ NEWSPAPER NON-ENDORSEMENTS in presidential elections are GAINING TRACTION, leading to backlash, resignations, and cancellations due to political polarization ✦ SHIFTING FOCUS towards LOCAL RACES is sparking debates on the MEDIA'S ROLE in shaping political opinions ✦ INDUSTRY LANDSCAPE is evolving as publications try to avoid ALIENATING SUBSCRIBERS in a divided climate #NewspaperTrends #PoliticalPolarization #MediaRole

The question gets asked about this time in every U.S. election cycle, so here's an answer via my editor's blog: https://lnkd.in/gdTH6T3g #journalism #politics #election #publicmedia

#eupolitics #uspolitics #elections2024 Heather Cox Richardson: @HC_Richardson on X ? Interesting commentary on the right-wing parties in France and England, Russian meddling in politics in the EU and the USA, and implications for the election in the USA. "The French elections left no party in an absolute majority, so governance will be messy. Spanish prime minister Pedro Sánchez nonetheless cheered tonight’s results: “This week, two of the largest countries in Europe have chosen the same path that Spain chose a year ago: rejection of the extreme right and a decisive commitment to a social left that addresses people’s problems with serious and brave policies,” Sánchez posted on social media. “The United Kingdom and France have said YES to progress and social advancement and NO to the regression in rights and freedoms. There is no agreement or government with the extreme right.” Remember Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas (no relation): https://lnkd.in/dwcuX2jU (Lincoln Douglas Debates) As James G. Blaine later wrote: He [Douglas] was everywhere known as a debater of singular skill. His mind was fertile in resources. He was master of logic. No man perceived more quickly than he the strength or the weakness of an argument, and no one excelled him in the use of sophistry and fallacy. Where he could not elucidate a point to his own advantage, he would fatally becloud it for his opponent. In that peculiar style of debate, which, in its intensity, resembles a physical contest, he had no equal. He spoke with extraordinary readiness. There was no halting in his phrase. He used good English, terse, vigorous, pointed. He disregarded the adornments of rhetoric,—rarely used a simile. He was utterly destitute of humor, and had slight appreciation of wit. He never cited historical precedents except from the domain of American politics. Inside that field his knowledge was comprehensive, minute, critical. Beyond it his learning was limited. He was not a reader. His recreations were not in literature. In the whole range of his voluminous speaking it would be difficult to find either a line of poetry or a classical allusion. But he was by nature an orator; and by long practice a debater. He could lead a crowd almost irresistibly to his own conclusions. He could, if he wished, incite a mob to desperate deeds. He was, in short, an able, audacious, almost unconquerable opponent in public discussion.

2024-Jul-09 `The BBC’s banner headline reporting the UK’s 4 July general election result was clear: ‘Chris Mason: “Starmer tsunami” and civility after brutality’ This alliterated nicely but gave the misleading impression that there had been a massive display of public support for Keir Starmer. Mason’s own analysis pointed elsewhere: ‘The story of this election is one of an electorate showing a ruthless determination to eject the Conservatives.’ Indeed, the results show a mere 1.6 per cent Labour increase on former leader Jeremy Corbyn’s supposedly disastrous 2019 vote share following the most intense propaganda blitz in UK domestic political history. Moreover, the 1.6 per cent increase hides the fact that, because less people voted, Starmer actually received fewer votes than Corbyn did in both 2017 and 2019: * ‘2017 (Jeremy Corbyn) — 12,877,918 * ‘2019 (Jeremy Corbyn) — 10,269,051 * ‘2024 (Keir Starmer) — 9,686,329’ So, while journalists are claiming a ‘sensational’ result for Labour, the reality is that the party’s total vote has fallen by 6 per cent since 2019. The real ‘tsunami’ saw a 19.9 per cent decrease in the Tory vote and a 12.3 per cent increase in the Reform UK vote – the wave swept from right to far-right, not towards Starmer’s ‘extreme centrism’. Peter Oborne commented: ‘Labour is set to poll about 34 percent, not even two percentage points more than Jeremy Corbyn scored in 2019 and significantly less than the 40 percent that Corbyn scored in 2017. ‘To put it another way, thanks to the second lowest turnout since 1885, scarcely 20 percent of eligible British voters support Keir Starmer’s Labour. Yet, he will end up with approximately two-thirds of all parliamentary seats.’ Remarkably for an incoming Prime Minister, Starmer’s personal vote tally declined dramatically: ‘Starmer has held the seat since 2015, but his vote share dropped by 17% after a surge in support for independent, pro-Gaza candidate Andrew Feinstein.’ Tom Mills of Aston University noted wryly: ‘If you’ve just joined us, Labour has achieved a landslide with less votes than it won in 2019. ‘Which you’ll recall was so bad that the then leader unfortunately had to be expelled from the parliamentary party.’` https://lnkd.in/e_w3Xq9c

📚 Resource: Amidst the democratic wave following national elections this year, there’s mounting concern over widespread disinformation, emphasising the critical need to provide voters with trustworthy, fact-based news. This report by the Center for News, Technology & Innovation - CNTI focuses on how legislative policies intended to guard against “fake news” are doing more harm than good. ➡ Read the full report here: https://lnkd.in/dQyBfC9y #MediaDev

With approximately four billion people eligible to vote in upcoming major elections, ensuring that citizens are well-informed and that discourse remains evidence-based is more crucial than ever. A recent article in Nature highlights the various mechanisms available to combat misinformation, from educational interventions to specific countermeasures like accuracy prompts and friction elements. However, the deployment of these mechanisms faces several challenges, including the need to classify information as false or misleading while upholding democratic principles. As we approach these critical elections, it is essential to redouble our efforts to combat misinformation and ensure the integrity of our democratic processes. 🔗 Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/ecxnymPD  #Misinformation #Elections #Democracy #EvidenceBased #PublicPolicy #MediaLiteracy