We at MediaPost hear a lot about fake news these days.
But the real question media executives might ask is: Can we quantify “fake” versus “real” news
— even if it means boring, less entertaining analysis?
Last week, White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders considered this proposition.
She claimed that for an extended
period — May through June — “all the major networks” were lacking. She did not specify which networks, programs or time periods. All she said was “evening
newscasts.”
What was her beef?
Sanders said networks spent “one minute of their evening newscasts talking about tax reform; three minutes on infrastructure;
five
minutes on economy and jobs; 17 minutes on health care; and 353 minutes attacking the President and pushing a false narrative on Russia.”
So Russia did not have anything to do with
manipulating the presidential election? Seventeen federal intelligence agencies said it
did.
advertisement
advertisement
It's not true, insists the Trump administration! OK, I’ll bite. Where is your data?
(And what about the investigative findings of national newspapers and cable news networks?)
By way of comparison, MSNBC looked at the President's tweets over the past month — his
“news” operation, for lack of a
better definition — and revealed its content.
Excluding retweets of others, from May 30 through June 30, Trump tweeted 182 times: once
on taxes, three on infrastructure, eight on the economy/jobs; 10 on healthcare — and 60 on Russia/or attacking others.
MSNBC did not disclose the other tweets.
A recent tweet
delivered on Sunday morning also focused on wrestling. Excuse me, pro wrestling. No, make that
fake wrestling. You know, as in fake news.
The presidential tweet showed a video of Trump in a staged effort at a WWE 2007 event. He was punching and body-slamming a man
— WWE CEO Vince McMahon. The updated video now shows McMahon with a CNN logo superimposed on his head.
Sanders complained that too much of the media coverage is focused on Russia's
involvement in the election, rather than big issues such as health care, infrastructure and tax reform.
She did not mention any emphasis on reality TV impersonating sports entertainment. (Or
is that the other way around?)
Why does the President continue to tweet seemingly childish
stuff, like the video? His supporters — 36% to 38% of the country —
would say it is about "honesty."
OK, where is the data to back up that honesty? And who is the source?
Can the findings be verified? You know, the boring stuff.
Just give us your data and research — and let the public and business executives decide. Too dull, you say? It delivers too
little
entertaining and body-slamming impact?
Yep, now I am listening.