The left turns on Spanish language Univision for hosting Trump
Univision – a television platform owned by Televisaunivision – is the largest Spanish language news platform in the nation. Historically, it has had a left leaning policy.
You may recall the contretemps between Univision’s Miami-based anchor Jorge Ramos and Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election. After Trump had rejected an invitation to appear on Ramos’ television show, the news host travelled to Dubuque, Iowa to attend a Trump press conference. When Trump did not recognize him for a question, Ramos became so belligerent and argumentative that he had to be escorted out of a Trump press conference.
Fast forward to today.
Univision invited Trump to appear in a townhall meeting with their predominantly Latin audience. It was the counterpart to an earlier Harris townhall meeting. Trump accepted. It was a generally well run meeting. Trump was asked both tough and softball questions. The moderator allowed the exchanges to be between Trump and the audience – without participating in the debate under the ruse of fact checking.
Weeeell … that is when Democrats and the left-wing media went ballistic.
Former Univision president Joaquin Blaya appeared on “Morning Joe” to castigate the news network he once headed. He called the Trump townhall meeting a “propaganda project.”
He went on to say, “It was really not a townhall. It was an infomercial in where they brought in audience as props.” That is untrue. The audience was random and asked tough questions. Even the New York Times headline read “Trump faces tough questions from Hispanic voters.”
Blaya complained that the network chose Mexican journalist Enrique Acevedo to moderate instead of Univision anchor Jorge Ramos. (That’s right. Blaya thinks the townhall needed a moderator with a visceral hatred for Trump.)
Interestingly, there was no criticism of Acevedo when he moderated the similar townhall meeting with Vice President Harris. A Univision spokesperson said the moderator and rules for both townhalls were exactly the same.
Blaya’s main complaint was that the network had shown a “lack of integrity” for allowing Trump to answer questions uninterrupted – and without the moderator fact-checking his responses. The general response from the left is that Univision should never have hosted the former President.
This kind of media censorship is part of the left-wing DNA. You may recall that way back in 2016, the Huffington Post stopped covering Trump as a presidential candidate and reassigned coverage to their entertainment reporters –ensuring much less coverage.
Earlier in this year’s campaign, MSNBC announced its outright refusal to cover Trump speeches – including his rallies. While the network has relented somewhat under public pressure, it still limits coverage to talking ABOUT Trump and using out-of-context snippets of speeches that are subjected to negative spin. They literally do not allow viewers to hear from Trump directly – and they do not allow Trump advocates on the network.
And now, they pounce on a news platform that they once exalted merely for allowing Trump to be questioned by voters – and allowing him to provide his own answers.
Media commentators and voters have sufficient opportunity to respond to Trump’s comments. Political opponents have the primary role of fact checking. They can provide counterpoints. It is not the role of the media to embed itself into a campaign as an active partisan.
What was seen in the reaction of the Harris supporters and her news media allies to Univision’s townhall was nothing less than another example of their use of censorship as a campaign and governing strategy. It also was a clear demonstration of the left’s panic over the movement of Hispanic voters to Trump. Viva la Univision!!
So, there ‘tis.
“the ruse of fact checking” is a funny turn of a phrase. Fact checking. Ruse. Weird.
“This kind of media censorship is part of the left-wing DNA.” Yeah, fact-checking. Censorship. Sure.
“Political opponents have the primary role of fact checking.” Really” The press has a secondary role, or less, in fact checking? But wait, there’s more:
“They can provide counterpoints” Facts as counterpoints. Fascinating.
“It is not the role of the media to embed itself into a campaign as an active partisan.” Obviously, the author does not consider himself in the media. So true.
And then: “Even the New York Times headline read “Trump faces tough questions from Hispanic voters.”
The author opened the door, here’s some of what the NYT had to say. First the title which the author edited for SPIN: “Trump Faces Tough Questions From Hispanic Voters, but Largely Defends or Dodges.” Sounds different in totality versus an out-of-context edit.
And since the author opened the door, some story excerpts: “In a town hall that Univision broadcast on Wednesday night, Donald J. Trump did not directly answer many frank questions on climate change, immigration, abortion rights and other topics.” Figures.
““I want to give you the opportunity to try to win back my vote,” Mr. Gonzalez, of Tampa, Fla., said.
Mr. Trump declined to take it.” A man got’s to know his limitations.
“Mr. Trump faced blunt, direct questions in both English and Spanish from undecided Hispanic voters throughout the town hall.” “Trump kept his composure, avoiding the hostility he often exhibits when similarly questioned by the news media.” I noticed this in the debate, the recent FOX curvy couch interview, and now this. Weird.
“But Mr. Trump did not directly engage with many of the thoughtful questions from these voters. Skirting specific answers, he retreated to his standard campaign language, often talking up the achievements of his administration and making vague promises for the future. He would not say whether he believed climate change was a hoax, and he defended his role in overturning Roe v. Wade without staking out a position on abortion.” That’s true for the debate, the FOX interview too. And no pushback on blatant lies. No counterpoint at all.
“Yet when Mr. Trump was asked about immigration, a central issue of his presidential campaign this year, he also remained vague about his policy plans. In front of an audience of about 100 Latino voters, he did not once mention his pledge to undertake the largest deportation operation in American history.” P U S S Y. He should have asked for cat recipes.
““We like strong borders,” Mr. Trump said. Then, he blasted the crime rate in Chicago, criticized Democratic mayors and governors and talked about foreign policy without providing any specific details on immigration.” It’s the weave, like the author, going to the hellhole they call our cities blaming Democrats for all.
That’s the real story and it’s a bit more than the author’s edit aiding his spin.
What is Horist saying? The left is watching Spanish TV? Hey, must be a slow news day feed in Boca.
Spanish can use some free advert. They’re a little behind in the polls.
Stranger danger, the Felon, why do you think you always have to add more to stories than is posted? You just have to take everything to a different level, don’t you? What you do not realize is there isn’t even going to be a November election. That EBS/EAS signal is going off by next weekend. Nesara will be instated, and full Martial Law will also. We are at this time under soft Martial Law and have been since 2020. There is no need for your hateful content to be here in the first place. We are no longer the United States of America. We no longer are under the Constitution of the United States. We are now the Republic of the United States. We now are under the Constitution For the United States. Most nation states have already elected new Governors, new Congress and more. Your words are now useless in the highest degree. The old Congress are being arrested now during their break. I’m so glad to see them go. We will soon see the execution videos of Barak Insane Obama, his male wife-Michael, Kamal Harris, Hillary, Bill and Chelsea, plus hundreds more. I wonder if you are on that list?
Out of context is a curious comment for you, Larry.
Fact checking is another curiosity coming from you.
Context may be a word in you vocabulary, but the putting it to work in your analysis seems impossible.True context requires complete and accurate facts gathered which complete a clear picture. Your politics skew the facts in your articles into a tangled untruthful tale. Fabricated historical context from your perspective in literary terms is known as a Fiction Novel.
You can’t logically think that tossing into cyber air some negatives about the left that will block from view Trump’s gaffes, impossible policies, and corrupt anti democracy ramblings can white wash Trump’s dark intentions. If your logic works then your assumption of the intellect on the right is like Trump’s. You both see power in a con and take full advantage where FOX is the rights only source of information and listened to religiously.
If Trump does win he will not remember where he is, not recall his stump promises, how much the job is over his head, and how precarious is his future.
He shows his inabilities by just his talk being incoherent. In no way will his walk be any less incoherent.
How, then, will you spin the obvious facts known all along. That Trump has no real workable policies, foreign and domestic is a fact. You pin the tail on this man your donkey and you will know what he with his devotees are. Win, loose, both don’t change who Trump is. He does not now nor has he ever possessed the right stuff for leading any enterprise successfully. If you can’t see it now, then you have no understanding in leadership characteristics for success.
precarious
in the air