Scarborough: Big Newspaper Boss to Staff After Hillary Lost: ‘We Did Our Best—Tried and Failed’
“There were people crying in this newsroom”
Joe Scarborough reported something stunning on today’s Morning Joe—an insight into just how blatantly, consciously biased one of America’s leading newspapers was in its effort to elect Hillary Clinton.
Said Scarborough:
“There was somebody that held an extraordinarily important position in print media who brought their people together after Hillary Clinton lost and literally said, ‘we did the best we could do. We tried and we failed. But we did the best we could do.'”
When Mike Barnicle told Scarborough he must be speaking of one of three newspapers, Joe responded: “you’re damn straight I am.” That would seem to suggest that the scene took place at either the New York Times, the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal. Let’s eliminate the WSJ from the running. So which between the Post or the Times was it?
JOE SCARBOROUGH: There was somebody that held an extraordinarILy important position in American media, in print media, who brought their people together after Hillary Clinton lost and literally said, “we did the best we could do. We tried and we failed. But we did the best we could do.”
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And there were people crying.
JOE: And there were people crying in this newsroom. I’m not going to say which newsroom it is, and it was a very big newsroom. And said we did the best —
MIKE BARNICLE: You’re down to three papers!
JOE: You’re damn straight I am. And that’s the problem.
MIKA: I think it’s okay if you’re doing your job, but we’re not robots.
JOE: Willie and I, though, were talking about this with three weeks left in the campaign. It was almost like they were playing to history saying, we are the resistance and we want to tell our grandkids that we stood in the way of Donald Trump. Instead of reporting about Donald Trump.
MIKA: There is that.
WILLIE GEIST: Well I also think a lot of reporters thought that was a safe position at that point. Because they thought Hillary Clinton was going to win, they’d be on the right side of history, the way they looked at it.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Gee, it’s like they’re not even trying to look neutral any more. It was so bad for a while that I thought the whole staff of the nightly news was going to get “I’m With Her” tattooed across their foreheads.
(Said with a certain degree of snark. After all, many of them probably already have the tattoo, just in a less obvious place.)
I used to make fun of people who believed what they read in PRAVDA. Now I make fun of people who believe the NYT.
“I used to make fun of people who believed what they read in PRAVDA. Now I make fun of people who believe the NYT.”
I’m sorry, but I’m confused here. Aren’t Prvada and the NYT the same?
Same corporation, different franchises.
Nowadays, Pravda has better flying saucer stories. It’s morphed into something of a hybrid of the NYT and the Weekly World News.
Ironically, I think the elite media helped Trump. The anti-media sentiment inspired a lot of on-the-fencers to hop off the fence and board the Trump Train.
This comment wouldn’t have happened at the NYT, because they still haven’t accepted Trump’s victory.
So that narrows this down to the WaPo, and probably either Cameron Barr or Martin Baron who said it.
I think you’re right.
All the media helped Trump. The early Trump stuff in the press was treated like they were fixing the game for Hillary (and they knew it would be Hillary). Drudge had a few front pages up last night, showing Trump as a clown.
CBS said out loud with a smile on their faces that Trump was making their operations profitable. The same for many other media organizations.
The issue, for me, is not that the media is partisan but that they continually deny that they are partisan. Growing up in the UK, everybody knew that the Daily Mirror, the Independent and the Guardian were to the left, the Times was in the middle and the Daily Telegraph and Daily Express were on the right. The BBC was, of course, firmly on the left.
Yes, even admitting they were partisan would be a problem,given that 90+% of them have the same bias.
In the UK, papers admit their bias, but there are roughly equal number of major papers that lean right vs. those that lean left.
My media connection constantly reminds me that there is no “Liberal bias” in the media. It’s a “Democrat bias” as ther is nothing liberal about their positions.
I continue to not get it. Here’s this Barnicle boob on MJ all the time with the most interesting story behind him – how he got canned by the Boston Globe for lying and plagiarism and MJ won’t do a special on him. tsk tsk. A great and wonderful media story right there in front of them.
The best thing they could do with those news paper buildings is pull out the presses and break the building up into small cubicles for a homeless shelter.
This is awful. Why, this is something the Russians would try to do!
Face it, without the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect, the media are done.
Me, I don’t mind too much that the MSM is partisan and has agendas. I expect that. What’s objectionable is their deceit about it, their denials, their claims and pretense that they’re not partisan, when they clearly are.
Maybe someone told Joe that happened. And maybe it actually happened.
I don’t think Joe is making this up, but he should reference either the person who told him or the newspaper. Expose them. He’d be advancing the public good by telling us who not to trust. But by attaching no names or organizations to the story he is protector bad actors and promoting what amounts to salacious gossip.
With that gripe out of the way, WaPo reporters Robert Costa and David Ignatius are sitting there at the table. It is interesting that the director instructs the cameraman to pan into the expression on their faces as Joe reveals this info.
All the major TV news anchors cried. I watched PBS, and I knew the election was over by 9:30 pm, by watching their body language.
As for the NYT, their website called the election very early in the evening. Probably unintentional, but their tracking site was awesome and 100 percent accurate in its forecasts.
It is all a matter of perspective. When you are hard left, medium left looks centerist. And that, unfortunatly, is their world view.
That’s true. But just because they don’t know where they are on the political spectrum is not an excuse to fail to realize their own bias. They were very obviously anti-Trump, and they should be capable of seeing and admitting that no matter where they think they stand.
Not only does the statement illustrate blatant dishonesty in the media, it typifies the loser mentality of the participation trophy left.
“Your “best”! Losers always whine about their best.” — John Mason, The Rock
Just because somebody claims it happened at one newspaper doesn’t mean it didn’t happen in various forms at every newspaper. Also, trusting any media talking head’s word on unidentified informants is a fool’s errand.
Trump needs to follow through on his idea of marginalizing them at the White House – that his, replace much of their reserved seating with conservative media outlets and blogs.
This one among them.
Clearly the WaPo as they didn’t even PRETEND to be even-handed. It was straight-up yellow journalism aimed at Trump.
I would love to see the MSM justify their hiring and promotion practices wrt politics. Their “conservatives don’t want to be reporters” line is as untrue as “Negroes don’t want to be doctors” was in 1960.
Thirty and forty years ago, we used to wonder if the US media was being controlled by the Soviet Union. If the stories about Putin’s support for Trump are true (stories about any assistance given aside), at least we now know that the media isn’t controlled by Russia, even if it is still controlled by communists.
Is this the same braggadocio Joe who also this morning claimed “several foreign leaders told me”….in speaking about Trump’s foreign policy. Yeh, right Joe, foreign leaders call you in New Canaan. LOL.
Joe lives 100% in his own head. He thinks he’s still in Congress, that he ran the best campaign, and that everyone thinks he aces.
So, I don’t know if Joe’s story about the newspaper holds much water for me, other than Joe being Joe.
His schtick is identical to Harry Reid’s… ‘a guy told me’. I trust it just as much.
and these fucktards wonder why we hate them? Holy shit, this is exactly why 60% of America rejects what the media is peddling.