3 ms·

If you think the media is left leaning you're obviously not reading it. Most newspapers, television and radio stations, along with the big new sites are contro

If you think the media is left leaning you're obviously not reading it. Most newspapers, television and radio stations, along with the big new sites are controlled by a handful of companies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownersh...) that are far from left-leaning. Rupert Murdoch, as but one example, is the driving force behind Fox News. Is that part of some grand left-wing conspiracy? The number of left-leaning publications is pretty thin. The Huffington Post, parts of MSNBC, The Daily Show, and a case could be made for The Economist and The Guardian. For every one of those there's a dozen like The Daily Mail or USA Today. > I'm not sure the SJWs have anything in common with the vast majority of the country... "SJW" is a strawman pretty much by definition, but those who get slammed as being one are typically in the under 30 crowd which are generally more accepting and understanding of social justice issues. The so-called SJW group has more in common with their generation than "the majority of the country", but that's how things always are.

Grishnakh 10y ago
This "left vs right" stuff is all a distraction and wrong anyway. The major media outlets definitely are not right-wing biased: just look at Washington Post, NYTimes, etc. What they are is biased towards the establishment. This was especially obvious in the recent election, with things like WaPo posting dozens of editorials trashing Bernie and extolling Hillary, and the coverage of such outlets working to get Hillary elected at all costs. Of course, this is painted as "left wing" in the US because the Democrats are associated with "left", but Hillary was the Wall Street candidate, so unless you think that "left wing" equals "in bed with big corporate finance", the media outlets aren't really left-wing, they're pro-establishment.
- astrodust 10y ago
  Hillary is a center-right candidate which is why she's so difficult for progressives, the Bernie-backing crowd, to support. She's also being painted as a communist by the extreme right which are so far to the one side of the political spectrum that everyone else is considered a "liberal" by comparison. I agree that the left/right stuff is irrelevant when it's establishment and profit driven. If you want actual left-leaning news you need to visit publications that don't give a fuck, like The Rolling Stone or Vice Magazine where they're not part of the establishment and have nothing to lose.

Grishnakh 10y ago

This "left vs right" stuff is all a distraction and wrong anyway. The major media outlets definitely are not right-wing biased: just look at Washington Post, NYTimes, etc. What they are is biased towards the establishment. This was especially obvious in the recent election, with things like WaPo posting dozens of editorials trashing Bernie and extolling Hillary, and the coverage of such outlets working to get Hillary elected at all costs. Of course, this is painted as "left wing" in the US because the Democrats are associated with "left", but Hillary was the Wall Street candidate, so unless you think that "left wing" equals "in bed with big corporate finance", the media outlets aren't really left-wing, they're pro-establishment.

astrodust 10y ago
Hillary is a center-right candidate which is why she's so difficult for progressives, the Bernie-backing crowd, to support. She's also being painted as a communist by the extreme right which are so far to the one side of the political spectrum that everyone else is considered a "liberal" by comparison. I agree that the left/right stuff is irrelevant when it's establishment and profit driven. If you want actual left-leaning news you need to visit publications that don't give a fuck, like The Rolling Stone or Vice Magazine where they're not part of the establishment and have nothing to lose.