By Jon Keller

BOSTON (CBS) – In a campaign filled with lazy thinking and dumb statements, the laziest, dumbest thing I’ve heard is that “the media” is trying to rig the election.

I hear people say this quite a bit, and while I try not to be rude, I do sometimes ask them a simple question: what do you mean by “the media”?

That usually brings their tirade short. The old mainstream media doesn’t dominate the national discussion the way it did, and the online array of readily-available options for reporting and analysis is so vast, it makes a joke of any contention that “the media” is capable of dictating the election result.

But I do give the doubters credit for one thing – all informed news consumers should be skeptical about certain stories that take hold, and make an effort to separate the facts from the spin.

For instance, while Donald Trump’s denials have been rendered pathetic by his own boasting about sexual assault, the multiplying allegations against him lack corroboration, a fact that should be noted.

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the Presidential Debate at Hofstra University on September 26, 2016 in Hempstead, New York. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the Presidential Debate at Hofstra University on September 26, 2016 in Hempstead, New York. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

And while there’s plenty to criticize about Hillary Clinton, if you go online as I just did and actually read the much-discussed speeches she gave to the Wall Street investment firm Goldman Sachs, you’ll see there’s nothing incriminating there. It’s actually Clinton at her best – thoughtful, informed, relatively moderate.

Why she poured gas on the negative speculation about those speeches by refusing to release them is a big question mark, and speaks to her unappealing control-freak tendencies.

But the bottom line is, voters, do your homework.

And if you don’t, don’t blame the media for filling that void in ways you might not like.

Listen to Jon’s commentary:

Comments (27)
  1. Lance says:

    Sorry John but if you really believe that trump and clinton are on a level playing field when it comes to the media you are either stupid or have been hit by one of the many acorns that have fallen in past days! Come On Man! Come On Man!

  2. hammerhead says:

    John while i disagree with you 99.9% of the time you makes sense this time, however Liberals do not want to know the truth much as much as actually go look for it, they are quite content with their UN-informed crowd mentality!

    1. paul dowd says:

      The laziest and dumbest thing I’ve heard is how some people think they know how “liberals” think and how they absorb and process news sources as if all ‘Liberals” are exactly the same. There are millions of liberals, progressives, conservatives and libertarians and no two are the same. Of course it’s much easier to think all these millions of liberals are all the same just like it is an oversimplification to assume all the “media” is all the same.

      1. bees_knees_6 says:

        I absolutely agree. A fools comment. Sad thing is that all groups do it…..well, perhaps it is the low information folks from those groups.

  3. bees_knees_6 says:

    I laugh every time a trump supporter echoes his moronic comment that the media has the election rigged for him to lose. How quiet he was when the media did all of his marketing for him prior to his earning the nomination. And how typical it is of Trump to blame everyone except himself for his countless shortcomings. For those who fail to be able to read a post, I will clarify that I am mentioning Trump with regard to the media control (which is the topic) because he is the only candidate I have heard who uses this imbecilic excuse for training (not by much) in the polls and also for ramping up to his major meltdown/tantrum should he lose. Of course, it is possible that Clinton has also said the media has rigged the campaign. If I have not seen this, then I would simply blame the media.

    Do remember that Trump’s mentor, Cohn, believed in using the press because anything is positive as long as it gets a headline. This is just more of Trump’s manipulation.

  4. jerry2286 says:

    As far as those Goldman Sac’s speeches what Jon is neglecting to mention is that Hillary has a set of positions for her wealthy donors, and a set of lies to make her palatable to the general public.

    If you want to actually do research instead of reading Jon “Fanatical Hillary Supporter” Keller’s usually one sided diatribes, go here and read the digest of Hillary’s lies –

  5. mstarvin says:

    Wow after reading the wikileaks emails from MSNBC, NBC, CBS, CNN, ABC, NYT, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Google, Facebook and Yahoo where they all were corroborating with her campaign from attacking Trump to feeding her debate questions to asking how they can increase her positive coverage and even give her veto power over quoting her….gee Jon no bias there!!!

    1. bees_knees_6 says:

      Or they were faked. But then the right seems to be having a love affair with Putin. Hope it works for you since we may be in his pocket come next January.

      1. mstarvin says:

        Oh come on don’t get wrapped up in the lying of Hillary and start doing it yourself. They are not fake and if they were don’t you think her campaign would have stated such? And now you are buying into the Putin did it mantra….sad bees just sad…

      2. jerry2286 says:

        Hillary acknowledged that the emails were real during the last debate. “Faked” is the media,and the Clinton campaign’s spin for low information voters like yourself who the Clinton campaign need to keep, like podesta said, unaware and compliant.

      3. bees_knees_6 says:

        Jerry – or whoever you are – she referred to one and then explained using Lincoln as an example. Unless you have other legitimate citations which I would appreciate your sharing.

  6. Andrew says:

    Jon, this dismissive and patronizing piece is tragically ironic in how you prove how little actual investigation you’ve done. It also shows your incapacity to listen to an opposing view, something I used to respect you for. First, “the media”: don’t play stupid here. NY Times, Washington Post, the Globe, NBC, LA Times, AP – still the source not only for large numbers of direct subscribers, but in terms of deciding what is news and what is not throughout the rest of the country. Second, the straw man: nobody claims that any media is “dictating the results of the election,” but we all know every bit of influence is important if an election gets down to two percent. Finally, how well did you your own homework? How did you “doing your homework” miss Donna Brazile passing a debate 2 question to Clinton? The NYT asking permission for quotes? Your detailed scrutiny of wikileaks exonerates Clinton on her Goldman Sachs speeches, so apparently you think wikileaks is authentic. If so, why didn’t you cite the “open borders” speech to Brazilian bankers? And didn’t your Wikileaks homework include a review question or two on Podesta’s delivery of news to “friendly” reporters? Perhaps you didn’t quite get to attempts to create a revolution in the Catholic Church by means of Democrat-funded phony Catholic organizations? Check out Archbishop Chaput on that – as he recently posted, he was plied by two operatives of one of them. You think wikileaks is legitimate, so why isn’t it a media issue that the Times, Globe, and tv news (you know, “the media”) have a virtual blackout of wikileaks? Why isn’t it a media issue that WBZ’s own coverage of wikileaks covers only banal tangents instead of the real news? I guess the problem is that you’re part of the media bias you’re denying, or you are hopelessly lazy and stupid. Doesn’t matter to me. I’ve done my homework. Yours is getting an “F.”

  7. The Owl says:

    Jon, Jon, Jon…Have you not been reading the comments on YOUR OWN blog?

    You’ve spent the entire election season posting “scathing” articles against Donald Trump, ignoring or downplaying the many drips of ethically challenged actions of Hillary Clinton, and avoiding saying anything substantive…and little of that…about Bernie Sanders or the other Republican candidates.

    And you continue to evade telling us why you chose to do so.

    And you wonder why people are saying that the press is biased?

    I am sure that you are most defensive about your choices, but to be willfully ignorant is unacceptable, sir.

    1. bees_knees_6 says:

      pssssttttt – he’s a libertarian. He is just smart enough to know that Trump is a real and present danger. As far as being defensive about choices….pot? I have never heard more people on the defensive about Trump. I know Clinton has made mistakes. I know the third party candidates have problems. I know that we don’t have great choices. For Trump supporters, however, you’d think he was a god. There is never a question that each and every word from his mouth is gospel…..cult-like is the word that comes to mind.

      1. Andrew says:

        I never wanted Trump. I wanted Carly or Ted, even Marco. I don’t see Trump walking on water. I see Hillary as a clear and present danger representing a party that openly complains about the First Amendment, let alone the Second. I see her mishandling top-secret satellite information and making the pointless lie about a video provoking Benghazi, then saying ‘so four people died, what does it matter any more?’ I see a power-crazed dictator who lives outside the rule of law. It’s not just that her incompetence is demonstrable in the shambles of our influence in the Middle East, Europe, and China. I don’t like Trump, but Hillary’s track record is dangerous.

      2. mstarvin says:

        Pssst…if you think that Jon is a Libertarian then you are intellectually right where Podesta wants you to be….

      3. bees_knees_6 says:

        Andrew – what “you see” reads like right wing media headlines.

        MO – have you read Jon’s book……hint – it begins “The Bluest State:…..”

      4. mstarvin says:

        Huh…bees you really are a lost cause….too bad.

      5. bees_knees_6 says:

        ahhh, dear, dear, MO – I’m not the one using another or several names.

        Is there a reason you simply cannot read what a person says…perhaps that is why there is so much you do not understand. The funny party is when YOU don’t understand something, you lash out at the other person as if your failing is their fault. Here you go….

      6. mstarvin says:

        I use one name some troll, a Democrat from his postings, has been using my screen name as WBZ no longer ties your name to your email… Second point…if you read Jon’s book and read his blogs and still feel he is a Libertarian…well as I stated bees you are just where Podesta wants you!!!

  8. mikey says:

    Who would want the job? The national debt is about to hit 20 trillion while the 79 million baby boomers are signing up for their Medicare and Social Security benefits as this nation’s economy remains vanilla at best. Uh oh.

    1. bees_knees_6 says:

      In that short comment, you have pretty much summed up the problem. No wonder we have lousy choices……who would want the job. Indeed.

  9. bees_knees_6 says:

    Soooooo – if he wins are we to assume he will step down since he is so certain that the election is rigged. It is a win-win in my opinion.

    And is it November 28 yet?

  10. Concerned American says:

    It is precisely because the media pulls out all the stops to help Democrats that Jon is right to implore us to do our homework. If we do that, then we know enough to take the media’s “reporting” with a few grains of salt and then some, and also know enough to find places that will do the kind of investigative reporting the media would do if it would help Democrats.

    Imagine, if you will, a Republican president using a pseudonym in communications with their Secretary of State, who had used only a private e-mail server and was then running for president, had hamstrung the DOJ and FBI to ensure there would be no possibility of charges for the illegal activity. A story like that would be top news for weeks, with “reporters” bringing up the possibility of said president resigning or being impeached and said presidential candidate dropping out of the race.

    Imagine, if you will, an underling of the same Republican Sec. of State pressuring the FBI to alter classification of e-mails with a quid pro quo.

    Imagine, if you will, campaign officials of said Republican candidate speaking of “needy Latinos.”

    Imagine the coverage of those stories. They would be the top news stories every day and night for weeks on ABC, CBS, CNN (Clinton News Network), MSNBC, NBS, NY Times, Washington Post. etc.

    And then look at the current reality: crickets from those outlets about Hillary Clinton’s words and actions.

  11. publicdole says:

    TRYING????????? It is rigged by the media year ago. Nothing to discuss about Hillary criminal activities in everything she has and is doing. Got it commies with a “C” in your logo.

    1. Concerned American says:

      Perhaps even a (C).

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s