By classifying coverage of his campaign as entertainment.
https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/901222127583596544 …
-
-
Replying to @KailiJoy
No, with this note. The "entertainment" cloistering was an effort to say this is different, needs to be covered differently.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ryangrim
Do you still think it was a good idea, you know, considering?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KailiJoy
It's easy to talk on panels about doing media differently. On a day-to-day basis, there are limited options....
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That was a way to scream, daily, that this was not normal, this man is a fraud, do not give him wall to wall coverage as if he's serious...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
We hoped the rest of the media would follow. They didn't. I don't regret trying.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ryangrim
The site had good coverage, especially by
@LEBassett. But calling it entertainment seemed misguided at the time and painfully wrong now.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KailiJoy @LEBassett
Why do you think CNN had him on all day?? The media made trump. They didn't have to. We said ignore him. He should have been relegated.
1 reply 3 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ryangrim
Or he should have been taken seriously as a threat to our democracy and human decency. Not mere entertainment.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @KailiJoy
When it was clear the media was not following our lead in relegating him to the side, we moved him to pol and appended our editor's note.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
We could have covered him like normal like the rest of the media and saved ourself the heat. I'm proud that we tried, sorry you disapprove
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.