film / tv / substack / social media / lists / web / celeb / pajiba love / misc / about / cbr
film / tv / substack / web / celeb

Samantha Bee Takes On the Media's Gross Inability to Adapt to Donald Trump

By Emily Cutler | Late Night TV | September 13, 2016 |

By Emily Cutler | Late Night TV | September 13, 2016 |

You guys have that friend with whom you go way back, and regardless of how long it’s been since you’ve seen each other you immediately fall into that comfortable rhythm of easy friendship? I do. And Samantha Bee is not that friend.

After being off for a few weeks, Sam is finally back and it took a minute to remember how much I loved her. I didn’t love the first segment as much as I thought I would. She’s completely right about the shitty way Clinton is treated in the media, but I can’t get too terrified about Trump’s chances of winning the election. I’m not arguing that anyone should decide that they don’t need to vote, but I am arguing that if I had a one-in-three chance of getting the job I was applying for, I wouldn’t quit my current position.

But then the show moved on to everyone’s favorite justifiable punching bag: the media. And just when you thought news pundits couldn’t say anything else to shock you, CNN anchor Carol Costello dropped in at the 0:24 mark with this enlightenment nugget.

Mr. Trump said he would have ordered his generals to seize oil from our enemies. Isn’t that against the Geneva Convention or is that a good idea?

I’m going to be charitable and ignore the first part of Costello’s question. Maybe from a purely legal standpoint, there is some debate about the interpretation of specific clauses in the Geneva Convention. But “is that a good idea?” No. Of course it’s not a good idea. Why are you giving any credence to the idea at all? If O.J. Simpson said, “I’m going to order my friends to seize items that I claim were stolen from me,” would you ask, “Is that a good idea?” Or would you say, “Thank God O.J.’s in jail for that very clear instance of armed robbery he engaged in?”

If journalists no longer want to do the job of researching issues, presenting the facts to the general public, and educating us on important topics, great. But then they don’t get to claim any professional integrity. Not as a punishment, but in the same way that someone who says, “It’s not my job to diagnose and treat illnesses” no longer gets to be a doctor.

Luckily for me my new-old BFF has perfectly captured the sentiment I’m trying to express.
“News organizations simply are not equipped to cover a candidate whose entire being is a lie.” Their inability to adapt is a gross failure of their responsibilities. Is that a travesty of our social and educational systems, or is that a good idea?