Fox News cracked the formula that extreme partisanship would lead to higher revenue. And it worked, and now almost all news networks have a partisan slant. People don’t want to hear the news, they want to hear their thoughts being validated by the news.
I'm sure Dasha Burns has learned to never do it again anyway. She'll be lucky to make it to any Christmas parties this year.
There's been carrying the water for the correct side since the invention of writing. It wasn't in HS I learned that Shakespeare was just the most eloquent genius patronage could buy. I had to learn that from reading, of all things, a mystery novel examining the slandering of Richard III.
We're in the currently modern world but human nature doesn't change and there's nothing more to life than power and resources and who has 'em and who doles 'em out as patronage.
While there will always and forever be a disparity between how we see ourselves and how others see us, what we think we are vs what we really are, what we think of this thing called "the world" and what the world really is (aka the map v the territory), the internet age and its virtual avatars, ie the fact that we all have an "online self" along w the man in the mirror, has made what is usually a chasm into a grand canyon.
This affects us all to a certain extent, esp the young and impressionable, but as for adults that are supposedly competent, intelligent & professional, there is no class of human with a more distorted and grandiose sense of self than the modern Twitter-fueled "journalist".
What they see in the mirror is a radical fighter for the rights of the Oppressed, a muckracking Che Guevara with a pure heart overflowing with love for the marginalized, a wise scribe who has climbed to the top of Mt Morality and knows best how to rearrange the world and everything and everyone in it.
What they really are is a class of entitled infants poisoned by narcissism and a child's lack of gratitude for all the people that came before them and made their plush lives possible, motivated by the pure spite and resentment of the kid who has been banished from the cool kids' table in the lunchroom, willing to do or say anything as long as it allows them to publicly destroy an enemy while preening as virtuous and clearly signalling loyalty to all the right tribal causes.
Of all the creepy creatures that ooze out of our devices every day and try to cover us with their slime, these supposed "journalists" are the arch liars and hypocrites and now that they've officially transformed into commissars they deserve to be treated as such: mocked, scorned, despised, until the day of their inevitable downfall, when the rest of us will get to point and laugh at them and their delusions.
If Fetterman were a republican, or, worse, a MAGA republican, he would have been systematically destroyed by msm and everyone in between. That fact is everything you will ever need to know about those people.
The way I summarise legacy media's role in the US (it doesn't seem as bad here in France - and in Britain it still reflects mostly Conservative proprietor positions) is this.
Burns reporting on Fetterman/media reporting on the debate
I saw neither so I am not rending a judgement on what in fact happened.
Burns should have reported honestly about how well Feuerman was able to communicate using the championing although hopefully most of the reporting was about his substantiative positions.
Debate reporting should be about what each candidate said on the issuers and about the opponent’s views and positions. Reporters should not issue judgments about how “well” a candidate did. Partisans can do that. Even less should they speculate about how voters will respond to the positions and self-presentations of each candidate.
I don't think Bari Weiss is such a great example of this kind of victimization, in fact the last two times you mentioned her I had the feeling I had suddenly drifted into some kind of upside down world. She is, and always has been an attention seeking provocateur, and her exit from NYT was predictable. One is almost tempted to wonder if she may have half-heartedly planned it somewhere along the way. Given your previous posts, I'm having a little trouble understanding this sort of blind-spot you have for Weiss. I mean, you must know that she is exactly the kind of degraded "The Intercept-style" journalist you are arguing against - just with a little pseudo-edgy, Bill Maher flavor thrown in for effect.
Fox News cracked the formula that extreme partisanship would lead to higher revenue. And it worked, and now almost all news networks have a partisan slant. People don’t want to hear the news, they want to hear their thoughts being validated by the news.
I'm sure Dasha Burns has learned to never do it again anyway. She'll be lucky to make it to any Christmas parties this year.
There's been carrying the water for the correct side since the invention of writing. It wasn't in HS I learned that Shakespeare was just the most eloquent genius patronage could buy. I had to learn that from reading, of all things, a mystery novel examining the slandering of Richard III.
We're in the currently modern world but human nature doesn't change and there's nothing more to life than power and resources and who has 'em and who doles 'em out as patronage.
While there will always and forever be a disparity between how we see ourselves and how others see us, what we think we are vs what we really are, what we think of this thing called "the world" and what the world really is (aka the map v the territory), the internet age and its virtual avatars, ie the fact that we all have an "online self" along w the man in the mirror, has made what is usually a chasm into a grand canyon.
This affects us all to a certain extent, esp the young and impressionable, but as for adults that are supposedly competent, intelligent & professional, there is no class of human with a more distorted and grandiose sense of self than the modern Twitter-fueled "journalist".
What they see in the mirror is a radical fighter for the rights of the Oppressed, a muckracking Che Guevara with a pure heart overflowing with love for the marginalized, a wise scribe who has climbed to the top of Mt Morality and knows best how to rearrange the world and everything and everyone in it.
What they really are is a class of entitled infants poisoned by narcissism and a child's lack of gratitude for all the people that came before them and made their plush lives possible, motivated by the pure spite and resentment of the kid who has been banished from the cool kids' table in the lunchroom, willing to do or say anything as long as it allows them to publicly destroy an enemy while preening as virtuous and clearly signalling loyalty to all the right tribal causes.
Of all the creepy creatures that ooze out of our devices every day and try to cover us with their slime, these supposed "journalists" are the arch liars and hypocrites and now that they've officially transformed into commissars they deserve to be treated as such: mocked, scorned, despised, until the day of their inevitable downfall, when the rest of us will get to point and laugh at them and their delusions.
If Fetterman were a republican, or, worse, a MAGA republican, he would have been systematically destroyed by msm and everyone in between. That fact is everything you will ever need to know about those people.
Not a rhetorical question: how does this all end?
The way I summarise legacy media's role in the US (it doesn't seem as bad here in France - and in Britain it still reflects mostly Conservative proprietor positions) is this.
News manufacturing.
Burns reporting on Fetterman/media reporting on the debate
I saw neither so I am not rending a judgement on what in fact happened.
Burns should have reported honestly about how well Feuerman was able to communicate using the championing although hopefully most of the reporting was about his substantiative positions.
Debate reporting should be about what each candidate said on the issuers and about the opponent’s views and positions. Reporters should not issue judgments about how “well” a candidate did. Partisans can do that. Even less should they speculate about how voters will respond to the positions and self-presentations of each candidate.
I don't think Bari Weiss is such a great example of this kind of victimization, in fact the last two times you mentioned her I had the feeling I had suddenly drifted into some kind of upside down world. She is, and always has been an attention seeking provocateur, and her exit from NYT was predictable. One is almost tempted to wonder if she may have half-heartedly planned it somewhere along the way. Given your previous posts, I'm having a little trouble understanding this sort of blind-spot you have for Weiss. I mean, you must know that she is exactly the kind of degraded "The Intercept-style" journalist you are arguing against - just with a little pseudo-edgy, Bill Maher flavor thrown in for effect.
“In a time of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” -George Orwell
Another great article.
And I doubt it as well, especially since the tactic worked. Fetterman won. (Not that Oz was any great shakes, but seriously?)
very important, well composed critique.
Hear, hear. Well done, as usual.