"these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white." This is one

"these professional journalists think that their readers can’t understand a nuanced world of gray and need everything reduced to black and white." This is one of the main phenomenon of an issue becoming "political," or what Orwell called "nationalism" in a clunky-but-brilliant essay. It's a "with us or against us" dynamic. Every fact, opinion or take can only be an argument for or against a position. When it's at peak (like now in the states), you get completely warped pictures. It's either peaceful protests vs brutal police and pro-trump militias or anarchist riots vs embattled police and law abiding patriots. I think part of the problem here is that everyone is a belligerent. The media, the police, the protestors and (obviously) the government are all objects of protest, which makes them participants. The CNN siege in NY was a sharp example. Another part of the issue is the typical modern leaderlessness of populist politics. Spokespersons usually moderate a position, establishing boundaries to consensus. This can take some of the edge off the "my side, your side" dynamic that more extreme actors benefit from.