What you wish for

shrinking news

Pew Research Center graphic

Conservative Alaskans seemingly gleeful about the demise of local news media perceived as leaning left appear dangerously unaware of the handout-driven landscape of journalism in these times.

As  reporting power across the country – liberal, conservative, libertarian, neo-this, anti-that and whatever – goes down, bureaucratic power goes up. It’s that simple.

Too much of the news is already reported by government mouthpieces. Too many of those mouthpieces are former journalists. Most of them went to work for the government because they generally believe more government is a good thing.

That doesn’t make them bad people. It does make them people unlikely to question their bosses.

Were this is all there were to the situation, it would not be good. But there is more.

Here is how things work as media organizations get strapped for cash:

  1. They get rid of older, more experienced reporters in favor of younger, less experienced reporters because the latter cost less. It’s simple capitalism.
  2. The older, more experienced reporters, by and large, gravitate to government in search of better pay and job security. As this is written, there are probably more former Anchorage reporters working for government than there are reporters working for news organizations covering the news.
  3. Because the older, now former journalists work for specific government agencies, they quickly develop a lot of knowledge about those agencies. They become, in essence, old-fashioned “beat” reporters. Only they don’t cover the beat for a news organization, they cover it for their government bosses.
  4. Given the information differential between the old, former journalists working a beat and younger, new journalists who know little, the former invariably take control of the story. They report it; they package it;  and they deliver it to chosen reporters.
  5. Overworked, underpaid and still developing their skill sets, the younger reporters rely heavily on what they are told by older, more experienced former reporters. All of this defines the narrative which plays a huge part in determining how a story will evolve.
  6. If the story isn’t evolving in the “right” way, the older, former reporters tend to maintain connections to editors, usually former colleagues who are also older, at their old news organizations, and if a working reporter questions the narrative too aggressively(see #5), the former reporter-cum-spokes makes a stink.
  7. Usually the situation never gets to #6, because in the new world of reporters and spokes, everyone just wants to hug each other. But sometimes there is a troublesome, old-fashioned reporter. One such at the Anchorage Daily News years ago got a bad job review for asking too many questions of the Anchorage chief of police.  Others over the years have been told to apologize to government spokespeople for being too aggressive with their questioning.

And that’s the way it was….

This is the way it is now.

As newsrooms shrink, all of problems listed above will only get worse. With few people trying to doing the same amount of work as many people, newsrooms will become even more dependent on government handouts.

It can’t be avoided.

Real reporting is time-consuming. Gathering, sorting and checking information is a laborious chore. Good reporters can do it faster and better than bad reporters, but even for the best, there is a limit.

At some point, it just becomes easier to rely on government officials who have done the reporting even if the reporting appears flawed:

“Hey, that’s what he/she said” is now the pat excuse for a lot of bad reporting . Nobody has the time, or sometimes the desire, to fact check the statements of government spokespeople.

And if a reporter were to find out they made a mistake, then what? At many news organizations, there is now no upside to challenging those in authority, and the potential for plenty of downside.

In the past a reporter would win kudos for catching a public official engaged in acts that resulted in his being charged with multiple felonies. Now, a reporter who does that gets fired.

In a world where journalism jobs are few, how many journalists want to risk losing their jobs over principle? Only those stupid or incapable of job-saving rationalization, and it is amazing the things reporters can rationalize.

Fewer reporters, unfortunately, won’t make any of the above listed problems better. Fewer reporters will only makes the problems worse.

But we’re probably doomed to live with it. The website Work + Money lists “newspaper reporter” as number 17 on its list of “25 Dying Professions You Should Avoid.” 

“Given that circulation has been dropping for 17 straight years and Sunday circulation of the nation’s newspapers are at their lowest levels since 1945 — when there were significantly fewer people — and its no wonder that the people who fill the paper with news are losing their jobs,” the website says. ” Look for nearly 1 in 10 reporters to lose their jobs in the next 10 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

And look for government to fill that void. Many government agencies – from the Anchorage Police Department to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game – are already setting up their own quasi-news organizations to cover themselves.

If you think news is slanted when you get it from an independent news organization that might or might not be liberal (the liberal tag is vastly overused these days), just think of what it might be like when you get all your news from government agencies employing liberal,  former reporters to cover themselves and make those agencies look the best that they can be.








51 replies »

  1. I would say under Trump, Amerika’ is moving towards the realm of “Corporate Oligarchy”….How else can you explain his family making 82 million dollars last year while in office??
    “Such states are often controlled by families who typically pass their influence from one generation to the next, but inheritance is not a necessary condition for the application of this term. Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical, relying on public obedience or oppression to exist.”
    Hail Trump!

  2. Representative Republic is actually what our government is, actually better than a democracy because it allows the minority to be represented, Democracy is a mob rules ideal. The people in states like Alaska, Wyoming, and other low populated states would have no say in our federal government in a straight democracy.

    Our founders of our country did this for a reason, so that all the people could be involved and be represented. (hence the electoral college) Otherwise only heavily populated states would have a say and the rest of us would be left out of the process.

    I don’t know why no one likes calling our country a representative republic. Might be some just don’t know and maybe the democrats just couldn’t handle our country being called a republic instead of a democracy.

    And for note: I am educated, a woman, but not gay. For 2 out of 3 reasons I supposedly ought to be a damn democrat. I’m in no damn way one or will I ever be one. Don’t assume by ones colour, race, gender, or sexual preference for how they ought to believe. How closed minded of you to label me.

    I am actually a staunch Constitutionalist (meaning I am for our constitution, our rights and our country. I am against big taxation, and big federal government. I stand for states rights for as long as they don’t infringe on our constitutional rights. My rights end where yours begin, and so do yours end where mine begin..


      • I think Steve Stine might of. I could just be a little edgy tonight or heaven forbid sensitive. Either way it would really upset me if someone ever thought I voted for crazy Hillary just because I was a woman.. public image is everything (haha)

        Another note/fact: the reason why socialist minded journalists are in such a majority is because be anything else and you will find it hard to get a job. And this might be something for Craig to write about, is that journalism is not anymore reporting facts but in fact trying to shape minds and sway the public/the world to their way of thinking. I have never witnessed so called neutral coverage on an election night where on the major news programs all the reporters were about in tears when their beloved Hillary did not win despite all their tactics..

      • I was thinking the same thing Bill.
        My initial comment was in response to Bryan’s comment as to why only 7 percent of journalists are Republicans.
        As we are seeing in people’s comments here…there is no shortage of Conservatives left in Alaska.
        That news is nothing new, although it does not relate to the nation overall, especially the East and West coast news agencies.
        Furthermore, without using her real name, we have no idea who “Zip” really is?

      • “Another note/fact: the reason why socialist minded journalists are in such a majority is because be anything else and you will find it hard to get a job.” I’ll give it to you that it’s “another note” but hardly a fact (except in your mind).
        Journalists are finding it hard to get a job but not because they might not be socialist minded. And Craig has written much along this line. It’s a tough market, today.

      • Bill, it’s a tough market for all fields of work anymore they say.
        However when you watch the abc, nbc, cbs, and newspaper people, particularly on a national level, and clearly see them pushing their own ideals through their news reporting on government or other issues. That’s not in my head that’s me being observant.

        It’s an agenda they have, to sway the public towards their globalist and socialist ideals. Call it the new world order, if the shoe fits.

        Most of this article was about our government only telling our press through spokespeople what our government wants us to know and have reported. I know this to be true, however it also needs to be pointed out, that we have our very own press spreading their own propaganda to influence and direct our country and people in a path that strays away from what our country was.

        Obama was their pick to further their agenda, so they supported him through press stories, then Hillary was to be next to push us closer into total socialism. I believe that’s why they were so upset, because they were so close and it slipped away from them..

        Now before you get upset with me for picking on the Democrats who are obvious in their agenda, I never liked Bill Clinton, Bush Sr, or Bush Jr.. This is going to be a shocker but they are all taking us to the same place, just via different paths. As far as Trump goes, only time will tell.

        Either way on a national level it’s gotten way out of control, so the best way to fight it, is to start locally and on a state level. Picking the right people to fight within your state and sending good people to DC who won’t lose sight.

        Maybe we are too far gone for saving, maybe the people are cooked and ready to be a full fledged socialist nation. I for one though, will not go down quietly.

      • Yes, Steve labelled Zip in the typical Democrat sterotype “but you’re a women, but you’re a black, but you’re gay, how can you vote GOP or support Trump”? Typical liberal ASSUMPTIONS!

      • You have some very strong opinions there, Zip. And they fit nicely into these comments.
        My only objection was in your calling them “facts.”
        Also, while we in Alaska are experiencing a tough job market that is not the case in much of the rest of the country IMO.

      • Thank you, With all that I’ve said here, I do agree people could be kinder. Being kinder doesn’t have to always be done through a bloated government program. Pass it on through yourself, it’s starts with one and spreads. Even if it’s just a smile, it’s positive..

    • “Representative Republic is actually what our government is..”

      And our representatives are elected, so it is a type of democracy, and can also be called a “representative democracy.”

  3. I don’t really care. Having said that:


    Otherwise, I could give a shit. We can wish and want for something from the past, alas that is a fools game and I fully realize that it could bite my beloved NY.

    OK Craig, go and fix what can’t be fixed. Same as it ever was, same as it ever was. People are getting what they WANT from the news. They ask for it and they receive it. That is all there is to it. It’s a business for christ’s sake. The customer is always right, so they say?

    In the future we will be lamenting things we can’t now imagine.

  4. I love the debate and dialogue that goes on here. And thank you Craig for your hands on involvement. I read all local media and also dable in the MSM as well as OANN and occasionally Fox. Also World Magazine which is a Christian news site that is surprisingly pretty fair and balanced and big on investigative. Maybe I’m an idealist but I have hope journalism will find a new normal and I strongly believe it is essential to democracy, which we know it is. I am troubled by so many governmental entities creating their own spokespeople and press releases. Not sure how to get around that or if it could be constitutional for our legislative branch to disallow it. Seems a bit like government control to me and from my perspective does not fit with freedom of speech.

  5. A good example of modern day “reporting” was the recent ADN article by Beth Bragg about the Dimond football sexual assault. 90 percent of the article was copy and paste from a government (ASD) web site. No calling or emailing people. No investigating. No effort. Just lazy copy, paste and call it a day.

  6. Great analysis and discussion Craig!

    So what is to be done about the problem of government being allowed to drive the narrative? We have unfortunately allowed these agencies to grow into too many areas. They grow their “empires” by controlling narrative about something, then proposing regulations or laws to deal with whatever that is. Many of the problems being addressed are either covered by other existing laws, are imaginary, or are overstated. A law is passed or a regulation is promulgated by administration, and people are hired to implement the law while reporters are hired to defend that implementation. The agencies never go away and their mission is never complete. There is tremendous overlap and duplication between state agencies and by both state and Federal agencies. Government continues to grow unchecked.

    A good start would be to eliminate the endless levels of spokespersons in each agency. Alaska is small enough to let the directors, commissioners, and governor speak for themselves! Commissioners should be able to articulate the mission for each and every program they administer, and why that program is important, and how only that program, operated by our state government with Alaskan’s resources, will address the mission. If they cannot do so, those laws or rules and the programs the laws create should be reduced and/or eliminated. The legislature should examine each program’s mission and eliminate those that are unnecessary or duplicative. Then they should cut down the resources assigned to each program to only those necessary to fulfill the mission. In almost all situations this will not include a professional spokesperson other than the managers of that program.

    The “freedom of speech” allowing government officials to promote their own bias has also gone too far. As an example, Commissioner Drygas demonstrating with AFL-CIO against the City of Fairbanks should be considered unethical. The contracts being negotiated by both parties contain provisions that her Department makes decisions on, and her demonstration shows partiality that undermines faith in fairness by our Government.

    Alaskans had tremendous hope for our current Governor because when he campaigned he talked about reforms to Alaska’s government programs, but our disappointment in his management is profound. The bloat continues unabated. We need to stop this insanity and it will take a concerted effort between the Governor and Alaska’s Legislature. Maybe if their jobs are eliminated the older more experienced reporters will go back to journalism. They might start blogs like you did, or perhaps use Quora, Facebook, or other sites to address various issues. With their new-found expertise they could perhaps help to mitigate cuts that should not be made to programs, and could help to rebuild programs where cuts are too deep.

    I’m not sure how to fix America, but here in Alaska we have a healthy mix of independent minded people representing left, right, libertarian, and whatever other political views are out there. Recently I was criticized on Quora by an “Alaska Independent” for saying Alaskans would never want to secede from the United States! It’s refreshing to hear people still passionate about things like that. This diversity of people will make good decisions as long as they can get their news without spin. In my view, Alaskans need to hear from their politicians and agency heads directly and they will then be able to make appropriate decisions for our state.

      • Well said. Forward Craig’s articles and your comments to all legislators and whomever becomes next governor. No government agency should be allowed to set the narrative! Also what is the deal with ‘press releases’? Again dictating what the source wants the public to perceive?

  7. Bryan…
    I think Craig is right and you are starting to come unglued a bit…
    When you say:
    “Just 7 percent of journalists are Republicans. That’s far fewer than even a decade ago.”
    This is a sign that the GOP is loosing support, both in AK and nationally.
    Many people (like Bill Walker) no longer want to be attached to a party.
    And with Cancer and Social Epidemics plauging our Nation, parties like the Green Party are seeing a rise in support (like UAA grad Kirk Wilson running for governor here in Alaska 2018)
    If you even knew the history of left and right you may stop calling fellow Americans “lefties”.
    This B.S. of left and right started in France many, many years ago.
    Not America.
    “In politics, the term “Left” derives from theFrench Revolution, as the anti-monarchistMontagnard and Jacobin deputies from theThird Estate generally sat to the left of the presiding member’s chair in parliament, a habit which began in the French Estates General of 1789.”
    As for why many journalists tend to vote for the candidate who supports social issues, well….they are EDUCATED number 1, unlike Trump and many GOP operatives…they are WOMEN, gay, believe in health care for all, and wish to help end gun violence that is destroying this country. These are the kind of things that Republicans fight against, so I would say you need to come more to the middle on the critical issues or you will see yourself in the failing minority as politics progresses in America.
    Progresses toward humanity and well being…not “right or left”.

      • Bill,
        I feel U.
        Someone needs to stop the escalating violence in America or we won’t have a Democracy to complain about.
        Polarized Politics is only increasing the hatred and leading us towards a police state, which history has shown only leads to complete Fascism.
        Many young Americans only wish to play violent games like Call of Duty.
        What we saw yesterday in Florida shows us these violent games online (many of which were designed in China) only further degrades humanity.
        A leader can be strong without attacking those who disagree with him or her.
        I myself see how the ongoing arguments have affected local community.
        The bumper stickers most seen at my college were:
        “Practice Random Acts of Kindness” and “We All Live Downstream”…
        I think we can learn a lot from bumper stickers these days.

      • First off Steve we do not live in a Democracy. Are you talking about violence like ANTIFA, BLM, Black Panthers at polling stations, or our leaders who say “go home for the holidays, get in your families faces or if they bring a knife we bring a gun”? If I recall most violence and gun crimes are commited in those “educated” strongholds you speak of. Is being gay a Right? Is healthcare a Right? I mean, all this silly talk sounds uneducated to me.

      • Stop with the “it’s not a democracy” crap. It’s a democratic republic, which is a type of democracy. The only person we don’t democratically elect is the president, and in that case we do democratically elect the “electors” for our state. Show me anyplace that conforms to your definition of democracy.

    • Walker changed to indipendent for political reasons . Not particularly personal desire. “Journalists support social issues becouse they are educated” pretty heavily stereotypical stretch away from truth . I know multiple extremely educated individuals who support trump . Chief anesthesiologists, mathematicians , many medical professionals small and large businesses owners . I know many heavily educated women and gays who support trump . The list could go on all day . I could also list the reverse who don’t support trump . Bottom line is that was a stereotypical inaccurate concept. What I see is you are missing what trump try’s to stand for . He represents the core strength of our nation . Buisness owners , constitution adherence, American citizens, a fairly conservative judicial outlook, right to life for unborn, ( anti murder of unborn) deregulation of excessively constrictive development laws , free or favorable to America trade, American national autonomy from foreign powers . I do tend to agree with your concept of getting rid of right or left . That’s a good place to start. No party is right on all issues. IMO healthcare is one . Due to expense of current health care either reform or one governmental payer might need to be implemented? I haven’t studied the facts adequately. Someone has to pay for it .so Its understandable when Republicans complain about how it’s unfair for people with money to shoulder a larger burden. What needs seen is in long run it’s cheaper for hospitals and nation and therefore all people to have national healthcare . Sick people are expensive. So cheap accessible health care is cheaper in long run to nip problems in the bud . The rich end up paying anyway . Republicans care deeply about gun violence. But it’s not a simple fix . Removing guns from law abiding citizens has not fixed it in any major city to my knowledge. It’s more of a social issue resolved by legalization of drugs , – undercuts those criminals profits and their need to commit all forms of crimes . Strong families resolve gun crime , and good paying jobs resolve gun crime . At least to a high percentage. Getting young kids off prescription drugs is also a good part . When our economy is good and dollar strong so both parents don’t have to work- so someone can focus on child care gun crime will be reduced. If government supports the sanctity of strong families a lot of gun crime will go away . Yeah I know there will always be kooks with guns that mess it up but history proves those kooks will use anything as a weapon. That’s my 95 cents ! IMO . I like your progresses toward well being party !

      • Trump was a correction – Obama’s legacy. Many reasons for that. Obama Care was an overreach – not about health but about paying for medical care. Two different things. Heath is achieved for most people by getting a little exercise, not eating poorly and not overdoing substances. Medical care is often a symptom of obesity. Government could help by taxing sugar and subsidizing running shoes! Ironically Michelle probably did more for healthcare than her husband, the smoker.

        Guns are an unfortunate necessity. They are the cause of so much individual misery. Without them we would have mass misery. People are people and we haven’t changed the way we think and behave, regardless of country or century. Many of the wars the world has suffered would not have happened if the populous had our gun ownership. That’s the trade – fewer individual gun deaths/injuries v. less likely invasion, dictatorship, genocide etc.

        Journalism will sort out. Advertising is revenue. Journalism is expense. You either need to provide content that people value and will pay for or have a good enough advertising platform to carry the operation. People appear to be less informed and less interested in being informed so demand for content does not appear to be increasing. Why is it that democrats have had dominance in information and education for 50 years and in both cases we have a sh*t show. Must be Trump.

  8. News is no longer news. It’s really commentary. And unlike the 3 branches of government, the fourth estate doesn’t like it when questioned. Unnamed sources (meaning made up) and making reporters experts in an area when never worked in it or trained in it has helped to developed distrust. Until the media understands that the public doesn’t “trust” them anymore people look to other sources.

    • and what would those sources be, Margaret? especially when it comes to government, are there other sources out there in the business of asking questions?

      a few citizen activists, maybe; but they tend to come and go because asking questions is a pretty tiring task.

      • Now compare the NY Post article with the NYT:
        Walk the streets of Bushwick with a canvasser for Julia Salazar, the socialist candidate running to represent North Brooklyn in the New York State Senate. What you’ll hear is that unlike her opponent, Ms. Salazar doesn’t take money from real estate developers. It’s not just that she wants to declare her independence from rich donors. It’s that in her district of cash-strapped renters, landlords are the enemy.

        One of the reasons candidates like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Ms. Salazar speak the language of class so fluently is that it’s central to their identities. Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton struggled to cobble together a credible self out of the many selves they’d presented over the years, trying to find a personal story to fit the political moment. Today’s young candidates of the left tell a story of personal struggle that meshes with their political vision. ” Heroes of the Left..
        I get what you are trying to say Craig but, I think it is going to be a tough sell in Heartland America.

      • Bryan: I am at a loss as to your point. What you’re quoting is an op-ed written by a political science professor, not a reporter:

        It appeared as clearly labeled opinion in the pages of the NYT where there SHOULD be a wide range of opinions presented. But forget all that, because the author’s observations on the appeal of Ocasio-Cortez and Salazar is spot on, and as a diehard conservative, you should be thankful for that.

        The “Heroes of the Left” is your designation, not the author’s. He simply describes a market niche these candidates have exploited. He’s providing intel on these candidates, and intel is always useful in politics.

        He’s wholly right about the language of class, too. A whole bunch of candidates are using it. It’s sort of the American way. Ronald Reagan used it well: “Tell me, are you better off today than you were 4 years ago?”

        Reagan was appealing to the economics of a broad, national constituency as Bill Clinton would later. Remember the constant advice of Clinton aide James Carville: “It’s the economy stupid.”

        Ocasio-Cortez and Salazar are selling the same concept in small, economically struggling election districts. The article you cite nails them:

        “The 1 percent and the working class are not economic descriptors. They’re political accusations. They split society in two, declaring one side the illegitimate ruler of the other; one side the taker of the other’s freedom, power and promise.”

        You should be happy to have that information out there. You should be happy to see the power of their appeal explained.

  9. Good article Craig.. A few items are generally correct but, lacking in detail. At least 24 reporters from CNN, MSDNC, to Time Magazine went to work directly with the Obama Admin. I’d venture to say all believe in bigger government as you mention. I will even say the younger reporters are more Ideologically more militant, “progressive”, and Leftist leaning. Even with Obama’s disdain for the media, and with his boot on their necks, the bootlick media fawned over him. Why? Because they both pedal an anti-American narrative. The real concern should be the censoring from Social Media types like Twitter and Facebook. But, I’d say the incestrious line between the government and media has already been blurred years ago.

    • Bryan: And I’m sure there are reporters are working for the Trump administration.

      Your stereotyping here, and stereotyping badly. Not to mention that I’m not sure of how one defines in anti-American narrative.

      What that would be in a country where the framers of the Constitution made the first amendment the right to free speech? They seemed to want Americans to debate EVERYTHING.

      • Craig, the Washington Post even says 91% of media coverage has been negative to President Trump and his aporoval numbers continue to rise. 7% of Journalists identify as Republicans. Not sure how I am stereotyping? I think most of what I said is an accepted given or is that a stereotype?
        As for “anti-American” I think that to should be obvious from “America bad to Cuba good, North Korea good, America bad, to illegals good, America bad”. Also, I believe you are correct and that there are a few, and I mean a few, reporters who chose to work with the Trump Admin.

  10. Am i to assume that the vast majority of people that call themselves reporters are liberals?

    • No. More than half identify as independent:

      28 percent are D; down from 36 percent in the 1970s. 7 percent are R, down from 26 percent in the 70s.

      Personal experience would lead me to say the majority are Libertarians with a do-gooder bent. They generally want government to stay out of people’s lives unless it is to “help” people.

      Journalism attracts a lot of people with good intentions. You might remember that old warning about the path to hell being paved with the same.

      But it’s all sort of irrelevant, isn’t it? Local mainstream media remains the general public’s only real watchdog on government at the local and regional levels. Even if that media is reduced by its own biases or cowardice to largely being all bark and no bite, it’s better than no watchdog.

      Hell, if it’s debarked and is just over there in the corner wheezing out a protest now and then, it’s better than no watchdog.

      • I am conflicted here because the media is biased with the majority Democrat leaning and FOX leaning center Right. I am going to go out on a limb since the lamestream media barely carries any weight these days and say the gov watchdog is social media (us). Social media travels fast and makes everybody a reporter good or bad. But again, do we allow people to express and foster their own opinions or do we need the “Masters of the Universe” (Facebook, Twitter, etc..) dictate and censor what we see and hear wbich is what we are seeing now? Don’t get me wrong, I am a strong proponent of the 4th Estate when it is blind to political bias and is really acting independent.

      • Bryan: I think you’ve lost it. I dare you to find a journalist reporting “North Korea good.”

        And if you read much social media at all, you should be well aware there are no rules, few questions asked and answered, and seldom any attempt to define factual information. Almost no one there links to anything to show where the information came from.

        But the biggest problem is that there are very few people doing any reporting on social media. They are opining. Most don’t gather facts and share them. They throw out their opinions.

        And the few that do sometimes gather facts – Jeff Landfield comes to mind – aren’t always good at weighing them. He reported KTVA was shedding 10 people from its newsroom. That doesn’t pass the most basic sniff test. If KTVA cut that deep, it would be almost out of business as a news-gathering entity.

        Thus the need to make a few phone calls to try to get a realistic number. He didn’t do that because that’s not what people do in social media. You think reporters are bad because they don’t do enough fact checking, and you think social media is better?

        That’s delusional.

      • Craig, again, I completly disagree. Take the shooting yesterday in FL. The traditional news was getting their information and video from Sovial Media where it was posted by individuals actually there. Social Media played a big part and still does in Trump getting his message past the “censors” in traditional media. I just saw an article the other day about how Social Media can influence milkions of votes. I am sorry I can’t recall the details as I just glanced the headline. Also, I must also disagree with you on your observance of Trump’s North Korean Summit. The Democrats and media but, I repeat myself, both wanted failure for Trump, thus America’s failure. The fall of traditional media shouldn’t be observed any different than the fall of NFL ratings over political grandstanding.

      • Is that any better or worse than the Russians influencing the election? Than the U.S. influencing any other foreign election, as we have?

Leave a Reply