President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Jeff Lebowski]

And this is happening. A vibrant and active progressive media and a vibrant and active conservative media exists and people filter according to their beliefs. Democracy in action, right?

Non poltical journalism is still good, when politics isn't infused in it. But political journalism should strive to a higher standard.

There is no such thing as completely non-biased media. That has never been the case.

[USUC]

There is no such thing as completely non-biased media. That has never been the case.

I agree. But that is no justification to settle for a more activist media than it was pre Trump.

[frank ryan]

Close to 80% of journalists identifying as either liberal, Democrats, or progressive is not "trending" liberal. It is liberal full stop. You are aware of the battles at the NYT and WP between the younger activist journalists and old liberal journalists? The same young college grads bringing activism into schools, into governemnt agencies, into corporations... they are also in media. I know you think this is all overblown as almost every liberal does. But it is happening to a certain degree all over. And these people are full of the bastatdized theories of the Frankfurt school. They aren't smart enough to be grounded in its philosophical tenants, much like Kendi and DiAngelo aren't smart enough to understand the critical theory they think they espouse. But it's not "just" some antisemitic dog whistle by NatCons. These poisonous beliefs pervade young progressives. Too many liberals bury their heads in the sand about this because they view acknowledging it gives strength to Trump.

With due respect, that's conspiratorial horseshit.

[USUC]

With due respect, that's conspiratorial horseshit.

What specifically are you saying is conspiratorial? That college kids are highly influenced by this and bringing it with them into their careers? Or that they don't really understand the original philosophical tenants of their world views? Unlike most of these kids, I studied critical theory. I had to read Habermas, Adorno, and Gramsci.

[Non Sequitur]

Close to 80% of journalists identifying as either liberal, Democrats, or progressive is not "trending" liberal. It is liberal full stop. You are aware of the battles at the NYT and WP between the younger activist journalists and old liberal journalists? The same young college grads bringing activism into schools, into governemnt agencies, into corporations... they are also in media. I know you think this is all overblown as almost every liberal does. But it is happening to a certain degree all over. And these people are full of the bastatdized theories of the Frankfurt school. They aren't smart enough to be grounded in its philosophical tenants, much like Kendi and DiAngelo aren't smart enough to understand the critical theory they think they espouse. But it's not "just" some antisemitic dog whistle by NatCons. These poisonous beliefs pervade young progressives. Too many liberals bury their heads in the sand about this because they view acknowledging it gives strength to Trump.

The reason that the preponderance of journalists identify as progressive is much like the reason that the preponderance of members of the National Academy of Sciences identify as atheist or agnostic. Some people deal in the world of fact and truth, and other people don't. Smart people tend to stick together. Just because 50% of the country is conservative doesn't mean their views share the same legitimacy as the views of the other 50% of the country. If you're MAGA and you think you're a journalist, you're not really a journalist. You should be excited that 80% of journalists identify as liberal. That means there is still some hope.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The reason that the preponderance of journalists identify as progressive is much like the reason that the preponderance of members of the National Academy of Sciences identify as atheist or agnostic. Some people deal in the world of fact and truth, and other people don't. Smart people tend to stick together. Just because 50% of the country is conservative doesn't mean their views share the same legitimacy as the views of the other 50% of the country. If you're MAGA and you think you're a journalist, you're not really a journalist. You should be excited that 80% of journalists identify as liberal. That means there is still some hope.

Good heavens, you couldn’t have crafted a more condescending, tone deaf response if you tried.

[Maximus]

condescending? yes. tone deaf? uh...have you been paying attention to what maga people will support? 100% true if they are willing to support a dictatiorship

[USUC]

The reason that the preponderance of journalists identify as progressive is much like the reason that the preponderance of members of the National Academy of Sciences identify as atheist or agnostic. Some people deal in the world of fact and truth, and other people don't. Smart people tend to stick together. Just because 50% of the country is conservative doesn't mean their views share the same legitimacy as the views of the other 50% of the country. If you're MAGA and you think you're a journalist, you're not really a journalist. You should be excited that 80% of journalists identify as liberal. That means there is still some hope.

Now that this belief has been articulated outside of your self righteous inner dialogue, read it out loud and see if you can understand why there might be a negative perception of journalism today.

I understand you have a set of beliefs that you think are 100% just, ethical, and correct. When you conflate all conservative thought with MAGA, the above is a natural conclusion I suppose. But until Trump there was a lot of grounded and serious policy positions that aren't reactionary. And those positions still exist in a sizeable portion of the republican base. Not enough to oust Trump, but it will outlive the current cult of personality. If legacy political journalists wish to regain trust among those moderates and potentially bring back some of the MAGA base to a more fact base reality, some self reflection is necessary if they think like you on this.

[BlueK]

I agree. But that is no justification to settle for a more activist media than it was pre Trump.

Can you give examples of Leftist activism within mainstream media? I'm just curious as to what you're referring to. I think liberal interpretation of known facts is not the same as direct fabrication we tend to see regularly on FOX.

[Moliere]

The reason that the preponderance of journalists identify as progressive is much like the reason that the preponderance of members of the National Academy of Sciences identify as atheist or agnostic. Some people deal in the world of fact and truth, and other people don't. Smart people tend to stick together. Just because 50% of the country is conservative doesn't mean their views share the same legitimacy as the views of the other 50% of the country. If you're MAGA and you think you're a journalist, you're not really a journalist. You should be excited that 80% of journalists identify as liberal. That means there is still some hope.

I have no doubt that conservatives would say the exact same thing about liberals, that they don’t deal in a world of facts and truth. That they aren’t smart and that academia and media would be better served to have a conservative tilt.

We all knew that inflation want transitory but it seemed only the WSJ didn’t toe the liberal line on that one. We all knew “defund the police” was a horrible policy but it got amplified in the Times and Post. We all knew anti-semitism is rampant in colleges and throughout the left but still, even yesterday, the Times can’t even bear to think and write about it.

The liberal media has missed so many facts over the years that I have no interest in reading what they write. I’m a die hard WSJ subscriber (don’t worry, I don’t read the editorials) since they seem to at least try to report facts instead of talking points.

[USUC]

Can you give examples of Leftist activism within mainstream media? I'm just curious as to what you're referring to. I think liberal interpretation of known facts is not the same as direct fabrication we tend to see regularly on FOX.

Just a couple of examples... New York Times journalists have joined outside advocacy groups to demand change in their own papers coverage. Journalists publicly revolted after Tom Cotton peice was published leading to the firing of the editor who let it happen. LA Times, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, NPR, and more all faced journalist revolts over what they deemed as news coverage not sufficiently pro BLM in their peices.

As far as content goes, in addition to what Moliere stated above, coverage of economics focuses on Dem talking points, quoting progressive experts, and downplaying the negatives of rising debt. How the protests and violence of 2020 and and post 10/7 have been downplayed and framed through righteous anger. Minimizing or ignoring liberal SCOTUS justices own disclosure failures during the media blitz on the same matter for conservative justices.

But I kind of feel like im wasting my breath in this thread. This will of course be a blind spot to progressives because the lense in which they view the world believes that they are 100% right, just like conservatives do. But journalists are overwhelmingly liberal/progressive.

[Jeff Lebowski]

But I kind of feel like im wasting my breath in this thread. This will of course be a blind spot to progressives because the lense in which they view the world believes that they are 100% right, just like conservatives do. But journalists are overwhelmingly liberal/progressive.

Unlike conservative ignoramuses, they deal in facts and truth! And they are super smart and not gullible, just like the academy of science dudes.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I have no doubt that conservatives would say the exact same thing about liberals, that they don’t deal in a world of facts and truth. That they aren’t smart and that academia and media would be better served to have a conservative tilt.

We all knew that inflation want transitory but it seemed only the WSJ didn’t toe the liberal line on that one. We all knew “defund the police” was a horrible policy but it got amplified in the Times and Post. We all knew anti-semitism is rampant in colleges and throughout the left but still, even yesterday, the Times can’t even bear to think and write about it.

The liberal media has missed so many facts over the years that I have no interest in reading what they write. I’m a die hard WSJ subscriber (don’t worry, I don’t read the editorials) since they seem to at least try to report facts instead of talking points.

WSJ is great. But there is still a ton of good reporting in the NYT and WaPo. I subscribe to all three.

[Moliere]

WSJ is great. But there is still a ton of good reporting in the NYT and WaPo. I subscribe to all three.

We’re not all welders

[Jeff Lebowski]

We’re not all welders

Cancel your subscription. They will ask you why you are cancelling. Then they will offer you a big discount for 12 months if you stay. Accept and then 12 months later cancel again. Lather-rinse-repeat.