Will Bunch expresses what I’ve been thinking since Trump was elected. American democracy is under attack from within. The fascists who yearn for an authoritarian government in the media are promoting it, and the media who supposedly don’t support it fail to recognize it. They are busy trying to follow the political playbook of the 20th century.
Spare me the outrage from the press, when the press is the entity that helped create this mess.
All this could have been avoided some 6 years ago if these clowns in the press did their goddamn jobs. Trump had a history of corruption going back decades. Between sexual assault cases, crooked business dealings,connections to the Russians as well as connections to the mafia, and everything in between. Rarely any of that came to light or was taken as seriously as it should have been. It was one free pass after another. They gave him endless air time because they loved those sweet, sweet ad-dollars. They considered him a joke candidate and never dove deep into his past finances or connections.
…And then it happened. He was actually elected. And that’s when it became serious.
Fuck every last one of these journalists who just sat back, let him slide, and just let it happened. Now they have the gall to talk about authoritarian-this, and fascism-that.
. Trump had a history of corruption going back decades
The press shit on trump like no tomorrow. It didn’t stick because they’d spent years and years eroding their own legitimacy, not because they didn’t air bad things about Trump.
During 2016 election The New York Times published thousands of stories about Clinton email/Benghazi, not one on Trumps lifelong ties to NY/Russian mob. As if The New York Times wasn’t in a particularly knowledgeable position to report on 70 years of NYC construction & mob history
I mean - you’re just wrong https://www.nytimes.com/spotlight/trump-russia
Not a chance did they ever report on him in the seriousness that they should have. He was running for the highest office in the land. He would have access to our nuclear codes and the amount of investigative reportering they did was on par to someone running for city counsel.
He was on trial for sexual assault, and they gave that the same seriousness as the BS accusation against Biden who was wrongly accused to being touchy-feely. Somehow when you are the Republican candidate, multiple rape accusations are somehow the same as false touching accusations. And that’s just the free-passes they gave him on his sexual assault problems, let alone countless other things they could have dug into.
The media absolutely has lots a ton of legitimacy over the years and them giving him one free pass after another only made it worse.
The press isn’t monolithic. This is one journalist stating their opinion and analysis of what the rest of the industry needs to focus on.
It is far more monolithic than people realize. Folks think that only the Fox News if the world were being overly generous to Trump when he was just a candidate. The reality is that all mass market news outlets were.
I was a loooong time listener of NPR, a news outlets that most would probably consider as neutral or even left of center as you’ll get from US mass media. And I totally lost respect for them hearing them cover Trump as a candidate. Even now, I can just about hear Steve Inskeep chuckling after a Trump speech and simply never taking him as a serious candidate. This was someone who was running for the highest office in the land. He would have access to our nuclear codes. And these fucken reporters, who I had previously held in high regard, were just laughing at some of the insane antics that Donald was pulling. They were letting this shit slide while they would have roasted any other candidate if they had said the same thing.
And it’s not just NPR but any mass media news outlets acted the same way. That’s where the majority of Americans get their news and they were all doing the same things.
NPR = “Nice Polite Republicans”.
Among the left, it’s always been a running joke that outlets like PBS (Petroleum Broadcast System) and NPR are somehow agents of liberalism.
I seem to recall NPR’s own ombudsman said they rely too much on corporate/conservative sources. They are not nearly as “liberal” as the unhinged right wing declares they are.
NPR isn’t perfect but damn if it isn’t one of the best we’ve got. NPR, Reuters, Al Jezeera sometimes, that’s all I got for being dependable. Washington Post can be surprisingly neutral considering who they’re owned by. Who do you pay attention to?
Conversely, I had to stop listening to NPR during donny’s tenure, they got so one sided it was disgusting. I’m a Democrat but I don’t need my news to hold my hand and tell me stories. Maybe it was extra bad becuase it’s the Seattle NPR station, but regardless I’ve not returned since.
It’s one thing to be Fox News and everybody knows what kind of bullshit you’re up to, it’s another to be a well of respected news station and try and pull the same kind of bs.
It isn’t, I totally agree, but there are far fewer independently owned news outlets and far fewer owners than ever. And that is part of the reason we are here.
But, yeah, this is one of a few journalists reporting on what is actually happening with regard to Republican authoritarianism.
Came here to say this. There is some excellent, probing journalism out there. The problem is, it’s not very profitable
If you can control who gets a job based on their background, (example: “no socialists, gays, or jews. off the record policy”) you dont even need to use invasive mind control techniques. Just have your writing teams sniff their own farts.
People like murdock control huge swaths of news outlets. The corprate office issues propaganda scripts that individuals are forced to put their name on (example, by reading it aloud).
Yep. They did next to nothing to really vet him in any way. And so many had a vendetta against the Clintons that they just could not help but try to get their digs in on Hillary and Bill as much as possible, too.
Yup. Republicans had been building a case against Hillary for some 2 decades. So much so, in fact, that even seasoned Democrats were falling for those attacks against her were ingrained into our pop culture.
Such a shame because she would have made a perfect president. She was a pitbull that was willing to call Republicans on their shit.
The same seasoned Democrats that stacked the primaries in her favor? The 2016 election was the first time I had a real voice in an election and it felt like it was just vacuumed away. The candidate who seemed the most appropriate and the most qualified got swept under the rug in favor of the shit-throwers. She wasn’t perfect, she was a better terrible than Trump.
In 2020 the Democrats scrambled for a viable candidate and somehow Joe Biden was the best they could give us, and it was an absolute gamble. His victory in the 2020 election was dangerously overstated and the danger of a repeat of 2016 in 2024 was ignored.
I was convinced she’d be a neoliberal and would make grand bargains with the GOP like Bill did. Those grand bargains included “welfare reforms” like kicking grandmas out of public housing when their grandkids would deal drugs in their project (like grandmas have the power to control their grown-ass grandchildren). The impacts of Clinton’s actions reached FAR beyond his presidency - I was fighting such evictions at Legal Aid during the second term of Bush Jr., evictions that were the result of Clinton’s bargain with the devil.
Though you’re right, most of the right’s anti-Bill Clinton bumper stickers during his 2 terms were actually shots at Hillary Clinton.
It was Hillary Clinton that elevated trump as a pied piper, the media discovered an advertising and viewer gold mine. Had her hubris not gotten involved he may have never become president
It takes a special brand of caustic to lose an election to Donald Trump but fuck if the Dems didn’t find someone with just that.
Her televised discussion with those millennials was an exercise in tone deafness (and cringe). Of course she was the better candidate but like it or not: politics is a popularity contest and although he is deplorable to any sane person Trump is loved by inbred Nazis. Hillary is just not likeable. By anyone.
Pray for the day when these circumstances change and the most qualified candidate is always the clear winner but that day is not today.
Folks got to pay for news to get good news. If it’s all just ad supported you’re going to get click bait that just generates clicks for ad views. Google destroyed good print news. The combination of consumer attitudes changing in the digital age to being less willing or expecting print journalism to be free, and Google monopolizing of display ad space really messed things up. Also, the shift from nightly news being mostly an operational cost or non revenue generating program to 24/7 cable news didn’t help the tv side of things.
You’re missing the forest for the trees, mate. Ad supported doesn’t necessarily mean bad journalism. There might always be a conflict of interest there, but that model worked decently fine for many,any decades.
You need to learn about the Fairness Doctrine.
This was a broadcast rule that essentially forced news outlets in the US to air both sides of a story in as unbiased as a way as reasonably possible. If you know your history, you won’t be surprised that the Fairness Doctrine was thrown out in the 80s under the Reagan administration.
People complain about Citizens United being an awful decision that was greatly impacted the way government works, and I agree, but the end of the Fairness Doctrine was also a huge step in the fascist future that Republicans have been pushing toward for decades now.
Folks got to pay for news to get good news.
Unfortunately, partisan propaganda and outright disinformation is free, while factual and informative news tends to be behind paywalls
This has a way of segregating people that don’t have discretionary money to subscribe to news services into epistemic bubbles, and the bubble dwellers’ votes count for just as much as everybody else’s. In a democracy, you really do need voters in general to be informed and unfortunately, not everybody in the media/politics sphere wants everybody to be informed and some folks in there just want people indoctrinated into their way of thinking.
Folks got to pay for news to get good news.
On the contrary: “If it bleeds, it leads.” All too often, news presents the world as much scarier than it actually is, and in ways that you can’t do anything about.
Today I almost clicked on the article posted on Lemmy about a gang-rape and murder in India. What the fuck would I benefit from reading that? I don’t have any control over what people do in India! I live in California. I can’t punish those criminals; I can’t protect the next person they would have targeted. I can’t vote the Modi-fascists out of office.
The only thing that me reading about that could have done is fuck up my day, and send ad revenue to the site hosting the article. It would be me rewarding someone for making my life worse, at no benefit to anyone.
People regularly pay for “news” whose only possible effect on them is to make them into worse people: more scared, more angry, more hateful.
IMHO, freedom of the press is a right that should apply only to people, not companies, organizations, institutions. No organization should be able to call itself news or press while seeking profit. Freedom to profit from acting as press is not/should not be a right.
Then shut down Fox News, CNN, and friends as dangerous shows peddling lies.
The pursuit of profit is simply not compatible with the pursuit of truth.
Individuals motivated to be legit press can work independently, form co-ops to share resources, or seek funding limted by law.
This is an incredibly short sighted, simplistic view of journalism. If for profit companies don’t pay journalists, then who does? Good luck crowd sourcing an international news bureau. If everyone is the press, then no one is because how do you know who’s telling the truth and who isn’t?
You act like all companies are evil and all individuals and co-ops are somehow pure of heart. It would be the same shit disinfo, just with worse production value.
You act like all companies are evil and all individuals and co-ops are somehow pure of heart
Right, there are fundamentally different motivations and attract different types of people. Roger Ailes for instance would not be attracted to a journalist coop.
What would be the motivation for individual journalists to spread disinfo? Sure some will, but a few people spreading disinfo is or even many uncoordinated people spewing BS is very different from a massive corporation with specific goals and the means to coordinate and spread misinfo to achieve those goals.
Not to mention the current American political climate was started in the mid 90’s by Newt Gingrich. He created the philosophy of “party before country,” along with the launch of 24/7 news networks, which is largely responsible for the mess you see today. ⁸ It’s going to take the same amount of time that started this mess to reverse it.
PS: Let’s not forget about the “my way, or the highway” generation, Boomers. Once most of them are out of office we’ll start to see the trend reverse.
Not to mention the current American political climate was started in the mid 90’s by Newt Gingrich
Honestly not sure where people come up with theories like this. What about the various Red Scares and McCarthyism? Variations on the same theme go back throughout history - the phenomenon isn’t about some unique American exceptionalist trait, it’s a consequence of the tide of the avarice of rulers meeting the tide of the mindless tendencies of the masses towards group mentalities. Power necessitates a way to gather support and creating an in-group and out-group accomplishes that.
Tradition attributes the origin of the motto to Philip II of Macedon: Greek: διαίρει καὶ βασίλευε diaírei kài basíleue, in Ancient Greek, meaning “divide and rule” wiki
This seemingly (though not really) simple truth is really propaganda. CNN isn’t unbiased, but then, no one is. Fox News is blatantly lying. Mentioning both sides is a way of whitewashing the truth about the worse actor. Tying the complaint to corporate profits is a way of disguising the real message.
No one should take news reporting at face value. Everyone should be educated in media literacy. But there’s a big difference between a motivated agenda and outright disinformation.
A side-observation that I think is truly only coincidence: user name is Kool_Newt. Newt Gingrich is one of the people I blame most for setting us on this cursed path of culture war and lunacy. It definitely existed long before him (Caning of Charles Sumner), but he lit that fuse on fire and fanned the flames.
I agree Fox News is a special kind of programming consisting of many whole cloth fabrications aimed at less critical thinkers, but don’t kid yourself about CNN, MSNBC etc, they blatantly lie and propagandize too, it’s just less overt.
Also, not Newt Gangrene – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt
It is, and will always be- capitalism. When everything is for profit, lies become commodities. This system can work, until there is a crisis that markets can’t absorb. Climate change cannot be commodified because it affects consumers. Fascism is capital’s answer to the crisis. It can’t be voted away. We must demand for a planned economy to transform into a sustainable society. It’s our only hope. This is where we need to be.
Hate to break it to you, but sometimes the opposite of a bad thing is another bad thing. Not even China rocks a planned economy anymore. They have these things like money and markets instead now.
I think that’s his point: the China that existed as a planned economy collapsed decades ago and got replaced with their current quasi-capitalist system because the planned economy model was even worse than free market capitalism.
Then China will collapse too. You have to get out of binary thinking. Us versus them. Any society based on growth will fail. Produce resources for survivability. That is all. Our way of doing things is gone. It can’t continue. Adapt or die.
While you’re getting out of binary thinking, consider that perhaps fully capitalist and fully planned economies are both bad, and a compromise between the two, attempting to harness the best features of each, is necessary.
Just like over-eating and under-eating are both bad. A healthy balance is better.
I read an article not too long ago about a guy who started a worker owned restaurant. Everyone got a really good salary and any profits would be split evenly between all the workers. The article reveals that the business hasn’t actually turned a profit but it didn’t matter to the employees because the business made enough to cover it’s expenses and all the workers were paid really well (IIRC they were making something like $30 an hour).
The concept really blew my mind: a business didn’t need to be profitable to be successful.
Capitalism really does seem to be the problem.
Now imagine every business was ran this way. No overproduction. No expanding markets. Only producing what is needed. But there’s the rub. Who decides what is needed? Our whole cultural paradigm must change for this to be possible, and we don’t have generations to work out the kinks. It truly is the tragedy of the commons.
American democracy is under attack
no:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/08/22/american-democracy-was-never-designed-to-be-democratic
Also, anyone who expects the MSM to serve the interests of anyone but the rich - have you been living under a rock?
You’re right, it’s a response to the part I quoted and responded to, which is why I quoted it and responded to it.
At least I actually contributed something to the discussion as oppose to your pointless comment… ¯_(ツ)_/¯
If you really felt that way, you could really clarify how the founders oligarchic intents relate to present day journalists giving Trump a pass on decades of criminality.
Yes, most left of Mitt Romney would agree there is room for improvement in the Constitution and that rich people have too much power. Certainly capitalism causes newspapers to sell the horse race. But what’s your actual thesis? We should give up and let the oligarchs win? That George Washington loved bad journalism?
Sigh…It was a solid article, but it’s a both sides issue.
outdated and detestable hierarchies of white supremacy and the patriarchy.
That’s where the both sides come in. Centrists like me are the enemy.
For example: I’m for equal rights and LGBT rights, but against kids participating in drag shows. Dancing for dollars is not a skill preteens should have. (Yes, I’ve been to a drag show when that happened, and that’s when I turned in my hard liberal card). I’m for BLM, but for the love of god, stop protesting people getting shot while holding a weapon. George Floyd was tragic, Travon Martin Michael Brown was justified.
The whole world hates men like me. I’m just a middle class white dude making responsible decisions. I’m clearly the devil according to both sides of major media these days. I’m either a liberal elite or a TERF. There’s no in-between. There’s no subtle discussions to be had about any major issues today. You’re either in the frothing mad Trump army, or you’re in the frothing mad militant BLM feminist mob.
Either way I vote in the next election is bad for America. The extremists are going to win.
EDIT: Just look at the the replies to this. It’s all insanity from both sides.
Found the “centrist”.
If children enjoying a show with people dressing opposite from their genitals is a good reason to accept Fascism, no wonder you’re a disgusting boot licker.
Centrists are neither left nor left. In fact I’d suggest they’re just Republicans terrified of the label because they know that they’d be lumped with white supremacists and women haters.
Let me be clear as well: we don’t want you on our side if the issue if this is where you ended up after the last decade - no one is going to convince you of anything. Stick to the Nazis!
I can’t possibly fathom the lack of thought that goes into claiming that voting against a fascist authoritarian who has repeatedly stated he will go after and imprison his political enemies, is just as bad as voting for that. Anyone who tries to claim, STILL, that it’s a both sides issue is borderline not intelligent enough to even vote; but of course one of the best and worst things about democracy is that everybody gets a vote, no matter how horribly misinformed and stupid they may be.
And that’s not even going into the absurd victim complex. “The entire world hates you” absolutely laughable. Just admit that you’re well off enough to not give a shit about anyone else and be done with it.
You’re just proving my point. Thanks.
EDIT: Seriously…what about anything you just wrote do you think will sway me to your side of any issues? The tone is hostile, the sentiment is fucked up, and you clearly didn’t read a word I said.
That…that comment right there is why people are so radicalized. It’s going to be a brutal few years for America.
If you need to be “swayed” to the side that isn’t voting for a borderline fascist government then you’re as daft as op says. Both sides bad, except one side has a slingshot pointed at your kneecap while the other side has a gun pointed at your face. I’d rather not get hit with either but if I had to choose 10/10 I’m taking the rock to the knee.
What drag show did that happen at? When? How many drag shows have you been to? What age was the kid?
I just find this sort of rhetoric so unbelievable, I always question it.
Maybe 50-100? Dunno…they’d have one once a month at my local gay bar. I hung out there all the time for 5-6 years or so.
None of them were kid appropriate. None.
You’re right. If a drag show uses provocative dance, sure a child shouldn’t participate. However, to me, participating means being in the show, one of the dancers. Is that what happened? Was a child or children the performers in this gay bar? Or did they witness a drag show that included provocative dance? Were the children dancing this way? Those are very different things.
If the child was only witnessing the drag show, then, in your belief, should children also not see cheerleader performances if they are provocative? I’m pretty sure that would disallow children from seeing the half time show during football and many other cheerleading events along with dances performed by those at their concerts and not in drag. I’m not saying you brought up legality, but should we have laws to prevent children from seeing any provocative dances and therefore have venues ban them completely because maybe a child will get in or their parents may bring them?
I don’t hate you, bro.
This crowd can be a tough one. I wish there were more people like you here. Don’t get discouraged
Thanks.
I had this discussion with a big group over Labor Day. And the resulting replies were exactly what I was expecting. Everyone latches on to their fringe issue and goes as hardcore as they can on it.
You show up with some nuance in a discussion, and you are the enemy. Period.
The Internet is not a real place. Swing voters are real though, and they’re disgusted with this shit.
(To clarify, I’ll likely never vote R, but I’m likely going 3rd party so I’ve still got a soul)
The whole world hates men like me. I’m just a middle class white dude making responsible decisions.
Oh poor little you. “Responsible decisions” like crying on social media about how mean the world is to you male white middleclass ass? Are you the next Kyle Rittenhouse or what?
You make me ashamed of being in the same demographic group as yourself. Try to educate yourself and have some compassion.
Hi, also a middle class white dude making responsible decisions and, white dude to white dude, you’re stuck a little too much up your own ass.
Great, you went to some risqué drag shows. Good for you. Do you think ALL of them are like that? Are you so short sighted that you cannot fathom experiences outside of your own? Do you feel like your small sliver of understanding means you should dictate a parent’s ability to make their own decisions on what is appropriate for their child?
And do you not understand that the children at drag shows is just a transphobic smoke and mirrors meant to prey on the “morally superior” yokals like yourself? These fascists are stripping away the rights of transgender people, making them scared for their very lives, because people like you are eating up this complete bullshit.
And just shut up about BLM. It’s not your place, it’s not MY place, to tell a marginalized and oppressed people when they can and cannot protest. Just because you think the treatment of the individual is “justified”, it does not matter. What an absolutely absurd and arrogant thing to say, really.
Seek more understanding before you choose to open your mouth on issues that you obviously do not understand. You cannot get haughty with folks that respond to you with anger and insults because you’ve clearly chosen ignorance over understanding. You need to come to terms with just how selfish and self-indulgent your views are before you can ever understand these issues you have chosen to insult with your callowness.
I truly wish there was a party for you. It sucks we only have two parties to choose from that are basically polar opposites.
My only pitch is to ask, of the two, which do you think is more likely to “make room” for more third parties?
Neither frankly. We get to choose between hard R or soft R these days.
We need universal healthcare, UBI, labor unions, etc…Neither side is going to provide those things without a bloody revolt.
Which brings me back to my original post. That’s what media missing…There’s a huge swath of people in the middle that are simply not affected by the fringe issues and we are at best simply ignored, or as you can tell from the replies absolutely hated.
I see why people are becoming radicalized.
