3 ms·

In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left?

by jolux 6y ago

henriquez 6y ago
I think it’s more fair to characterize them as corporatist and neoconservative/neoliberal. If the mainstream media were actually left-wing they would be propagandizing for Bernie Sanders. Instead they’re propagandizing in favor of old-guard politicians like Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi. But no matter how you slice it, it’s still propaganda. I agree with the parent commenter that this will only backfire, likely causing the opposite of intended effect on undecided voters. Tech companies like Twitter are not in a position to play arbiters on what is factual and what isn’t. And I think it’s really dangerous both for people to expect tech companies to assume this mantle and also to expect them to do a good (or honest) job of it.
- jolux 6y ago
  I'm not sure why you think there's an intended effect here other than "maybe get a few people who are more on the fence to read something real and make it look like Twitter is Doing Something TM." I would hardly be surprised if it succeeded at those things.
  - henriquez 6y ago
    “The facts” on mail-in ballots are mostly opinions though. It’s presumptuous of a tech company to insert themselves into public discourse to correct what they perceive as wrongthink, and it invites a dangerous situation where a few tech companies can enforce discourse that suits their political biases. Just because people may agree with them in this case doesn’t make it a good idea long term. To me this looks like a slippery slope into fascism.
    - jolux 6y ago
      The facts about voter fraud aren’t opinions, though, and the fact is that it’s extremely rare. What reason do we have to expect that mail-in ballots will make it common to the extent it influences an election?
godelski 6y ago
> In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left? >> The issue here is that everything here is considered the hard left of the media by Fox viewers. Maybe the edit here makes the statement clearer because before it was implicit.
- jolux 6y ago
  I'm still not seeing the edit, but honestly Fox News viewers seeing CBS as substantively representing the left in any capacity is a large part of the problem here. Fortunately not everyone who matters believes only Fox News and nothing else.
  - godelski 6y ago
    The edit was "by Fox News viewers" which was previously implicit. To them these are hard left, but to moderates and the left they aren't. It is a matter of perspective. > but honestly Fox News viewers seeing CBS as substantively representing the left in any capacity is a large part of the problem here. This is something I agree with and is actually the crux of my post.
    - jolux 6y ago
      Hmmm, okay. I missed your point then. My bad.
      - godelski 6y ago
        Apparently, given how many downvotes I have, you aren't alone. Given that I'm agreeing with a lot of people that are arguing with me, I'm pretty sure it was my messaging. I think part of that is that since we are so politicized and language requires us to fill in parts that because I tried to dampen it to those on the right that it came off as supporting them. Pretty much my point was: this links to only stuff on the left and so it gives the right an easy target to point to to continue with their claim (which I believe is false) that the left media is trying to control the people.

In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left?

by jolux 6y ago

In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left?

I think it’s more fair to characterize them as corporatist and neoconservative/neoliberal. If the mainstream media were actually left-wing they would be propagandizing for Bernie Sanders. Instead they’re propagandizing in favor of old-guard politicians like Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi. But no matter how you slice it, it’s still propaganda. I agree with the parent commenter that this will only backfire, likely causing the opposite of intended effect on undecided voters. Tech companies like Twitter are not in a position to play arbiters on what is factual and what isn’t. And I think it’s really dangerous both for people to expect tech companies to assume this mantle and also to expect them to do a good (or honest) job of it.

jolux 6y ago
I'm not sure why you think there's an intended effect here other than "maybe get a few people who are more on the fence to read something real and make it look like Twitter is Doing Something TM." I would hardly be surprised if it succeeded at those things.
- henriquez 6y ago
  “The facts” on mail-in ballots are mostly opinions though. It’s presumptuous of a tech company to insert themselves into public discourse to correct what they perceive as wrongthink, and it invites a dangerous situation where a few tech companies can enforce discourse that suits their political biases. Just because people may agree with them in this case doesn’t make it a good idea long term. To me this looks like a slippery slope into fascism.
  - jolux 6y ago
    The facts about voter fraud aren’t opinions, though, and the fact is that it’s extremely rare. What reason do we have to expect that mail-in ballots will make it common to the extent it influences an election?

godelski 6y ago

> In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left? >> The issue here is that everything here is considered the hard left of the media by Fox viewers. Maybe the edit here makes the statement clearer because before it was implicit.

jolux 6y ago
I'm still not seeing the edit, but honestly Fox News viewers seeing CBS as substantively representing the left in any capacity is a large part of the problem here. Fortunately not everyone who matters believes only Fox News and nothing else.
- godelski 6y ago
  The edit was "by Fox News viewers" which was previously implicit. To them these are hard left, but to moderates and the left they aren't. It is a matter of perspective. > but honestly Fox News viewers seeing CBS as substantively representing the left in any capacity is a large part of the problem here. This is something I agree with and is actually the crux of my post.
  - jolux 6y ago
    Hmmm, okay. I missed your point then. My bad.
    - godelski 6y ago
      Apparently, given how many downvotes I have, you aren't alone. Given that I'm agreeing with a lot of people that are arguing with me, I'm pretty sure it was my messaging. I think part of that is that since we are so politicized and language requires us to fill in parts that because I tried to dampen it to those on the right that it came off as supporting them. Pretty much my point was: this links to only stuff on the left and so it gives the right an easy target to point to to continue with their claim (which I believe is false) that the left media is trying to control the people.