The Hill’s media reporter Joe Concha took the liberal media to task Tuesday night, most notably CNN and MSNBC, for putting off the Manchester terror attack to squeeze in more time for Trump and Russia. “And look, there are some numbers around this that are just stunning. 105 minutes during the 7:00 P.M. hour,” he said during his appearance on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight. “This according to [a Media Research Center] study, was spent on Trump and Russia on CNN and MSNBC. Just 50 minutes [for the attack].”
“It’s not only what journalism looks like in 2017, Tucker, it's what it sounds like. And more importantly, it's what it smells like, and it sticks to your boots,” Concha quipped to Tucker at one point during his media takedown. He also chastised their lack of professionalism saying:
Any community access producer or manager would know in that situation that once the story broke at 6:48, it is full stop. There is no other story to cover. But this just shows you that it's media malfeasance marinated in myopia, alliteration aside, this is what happens now when you're so locked into one story that you miss a story like this where everything should've gone away and the should've been the only thing that was covered.
According to Tucker, the reason it took CNN and MSNBC so long to start reporting on the attack was because they thought the Trump story would get them better ratings. “And so even a terror attack will get them off it because they're completely addicted to the drug of ratings. I mean, that's what it is,” he explained. Concha agreed that it was a driving factor for them, but poured cold water on them with the fact that “Shepard Smith nearly doubled Rachel Maddow in what's called the key demographic, that advertisers covet most. So look, people are they want their news.”
Concha recalled how “CNN when I was growing up, it was the only game in town” and how it was supposed to be the reliable “spare tire” after Fox News and MSNBC came around. “And last night, I couldn't find my spare tire. I could not believe that I kept seeing Brady Bunch panels on Donald Trump in Russia when they should've been covering this story,” he declared.
He then knocked them for stacking their panels with anti-Trump talking heads. “May 12, another MRC study: 96 guests on that day were anti-Trump, just seven pro-Trump is a 13-1 ratio. I mean, that's incredible,” he noted, again citing the Media Research Center.
Tucker proceeded to joke that “there's other news that’s not Trump-related,” and about how the liberal media would believe anything, including Trump drinking human blood, if you claim you had anonymous sources. Concha was disappointed in The New York Times and The Washington Post because “anonymity should be the last resort.” He tore into them asserting that because of their reliance on anonymous sources they were ruining their reputations:
But now it's become the first resort and that's what's fueling all the stores because it’s not a matter of being accurate, it’s a matter being first, and it’s a matter of being more about quantity than quality and that's what journalism is in 2017 unfortunately. It's good for business but bad for integrity.
Transcripts below:
FNC
Tucker Carlson Tonight
May 23, 2017
8:40:33 PM EasternTUCKER CARLSON: Joe Concha writes about the media for The Hill and he joins us tonight. Joe did you watch it last night? What did you think?
JOE CONCHA: I have a fortress of solitude down my basement, Tucker, that allows me to watch four TVs at once. It’s on Twitter, you can see pictures of it. I'm able to watch CNN—
CARLSON: You poor man.
CONCHA: It's more for fantasy football but also for my job as well. And look, there are some numbers around this that are just stunning. 105 minutes during the 7:00 P.M. hour, this according to an MRC study, was spent on Trump and Russia on CNN and MSNBC. Just 50 minutes on an attack-- grotesque as you said-- in the city of the western ally where women and children, young girls going to a concert are killed.
Any community access producer or manager would know in that situation that once the story broke at 6:48, it is full stop. There is no other story to cover. But this just shows you that it's media malfeasance marinated in myopia, alliteration aside, this is what happens now when you're so locked into one story that you miss a story like this where everything should've gone away and the should've been the only thing that was covered.
CARLSON: You know I've been doing this a long time. You've been covering a long time. You know exactly what happened. Their formula is working. Their viewers think that Donald Trump is a marionette controlled by Vladimir Putin. They think this because they're being told it by the anchors over there spinning this incredibly complex and insane conspiracy theories and in good numbers by doing that. And so even a terror attack will get them off it because they're completely addicted to the drug of ratings. I mean, that's what it is.
CONCHA: It’s not only what journalism looks like in 2017, Tucker, it's what it sounds like. And more importantly it's what it smells like and it sticks to your boots. Look, I agree with you that it's good for business but if you look at the numbers last night, at 9 o’clock for instance, Fox, Shepard Smith nearly doubled Rachel Maddow in what's called the key demographic, that advertisers covet most.
So look, people are they want their news. And I remember CNN when I was growing up, it was the only game in town. Fox and MSNBC didn't come around until 1996 and I forget who said it but somebody compared it to a spare tire that you could always count on it to be there when you needed it. And last night, I couldn't find my spare tire. I could not believe that I kept seeing Brady Bunch panels on Donald Trump in Russia when they should've been covering this story. And it just goes back to CNN and recent studies lately just shows you just how locked-in they are on this topic. May 12, another MRC study: 96 guests on that day were anti-Trump, just seven pro-Trump is a 13-1 ratio. I mean, that's incredible.
CARLSON: By the way, there's other news that’s not Trump-related. If you’re a news channel, you should be bringing the news. It’s not all about Donald Trump and Michael Flynn. I was talking to a friend of mine is actually not particularly pro-Trump. I think it would be against Trump, but he’s watching the coverage and he said: “You know, there's nothing you could say that they wouldn't believe about Trump.” Do you think if you went on to another channel and said: “You know, I have evidence that Trump drinks human blood, just like a shot glass of it every morning when he wakes up.” Do you think anyone would say “no, show me the evidence.” They would all sort of nod in bovine agreement like “yeah, of course he does.”
CONCHA: The narrative gets fueled by anonymous sources being used in every story that we see from The New York Times and Washington Post. Look, The New York Times has something called a style guide and in it, one rule and it’s supposed to be used and now it’s the last rule, unfortunately-- that anonymity should be the last resort. But now it's become the first resort and that's what's fueling all the stores because it’s not a matter of being accurate, it’s a matter being first, and it’s a matter of being more about quantity than quality and that's what journalism is in 2017 unfortunately. It's good for business but bad for integrity.
CARLSON: I have a lot of friends at all these places, nice people. I'll never believe anything they say ever again ever about anything because they're liars. And it's sad. Joe, thanks for joining us.
