4 ms·

Unfortunately, you've fallen into the trap, friend. FOX may be to the right of MSNBC, but on a larger scale historically-informed left-right spectrum, the two a

Unfortunately, you've fallen into the trap, friend. FOX may be to the right of MSNBC, but on a larger scale historically-informed left-right spectrum, the two are not actually that far apart ideologically. Most "conservative principles" these days are just the modern liberal status quo delayed by ~20 years; for example, anti-homosexual rhetoric is dead and dying on that side in a way that lines up well with what I remember from the Democrats in the late 90s. The hyperpolarization is not to do with the right vs left dichotomy so much as it is a deliberate, encouraged-by-both-sides establishment of a false dichotomy designed to pen people into a small range of discourse. Some call this the Overton window; the deliberate establishment of contrasting narratives in a 2-pronged strategy was perfected in America by Arthur Finkelstein in the mid-20th century and is becoming an art form today. If you can see FOX as a "right wing propaganda machine" but can't see the other MSM networks as being equally polarizing machines aimed at a different half of the audience, you're missing the shot. The solution is to see the false dichotomy for what it is, look at who is pushing it, and look at what direction both "sides" actually push for. If you're on the right, they want you to have your attention and energy soaked up in this useless Stop the Steal push for Trump, who actually didn't accomplish any of the things his populist base asked for (immigration control, really bringing back American jobs, giving a shit about the working class). If you're on the Left, they want to soak you up with Biden instead of the more progressive policies that someone like Bernie or Tulsi Gabbard espoused. Either way, you're being played if you allow your energy to go toward supporting one of these useless figureheads instead of critiquing the system itself.

akiselev 6y ago
You've fallen for the trap of the 2d political spectrum. It isn't about bias, it is about intent. MSNBC, CNN, etc are capitalist enterprises biased towards revenue and clicks - it's in their DNA. FOX was created explicitly by Ailes and Murdoch to prevent a second Nixon style teardown of the GOP. It's the reason Disney wanted absolutely nothing to do with the news arm when it acquired the rest of the Fox media empire - it's a capitalist enterprise only in the sense that it's profitable as a side effect of their main goal.
- core-questions 6y ago
  > You've fallen for the trap of the 2d political spectrum. You mean the meme-graph one? Don't think so. Every time I take a quiz based on that it lands me near the center, yet I don't resonate with any self-proclaimed centrist I've talked to. > FOX was created explicitly by Ailes and Murdoch to prevent a second Nixon style teardown of the GOP. I don't think the intent decades ago particularly matters compared with their actions presently, which are as aimed (at the level of the individual Fox employee) towards revenue and clicks as anyone - just going after a different market niche than MSNBC et al. The ownership is going after propaganda and narrative control, of course; the whole point of what I am saying is that both sides are doing that. > it's a capitalist enterprise only in the sense that it's profitable as a side effect of their main goal. The fact that you can't see that that's true of the other side of the media is very telling. WaPo and friends lose money every year, but will never, ever be shut down. What could the reason for that be, other than to use it as a propaganda mouthpiece? Honestly. If you can turn on an MSM network right now and not hear the propaganda baked into every sentence, you need to turn off all media, read some old books, disconnect for a few months, and come back when you have a perspective wide enough to realize that both sides are being harmed, and having their animosity aimed at one another, rather than at anyone who is actually doing the harm. (This may be easier for me to see as a non-American, of course. I shouldn't blame someone who has been soaking in yank propaganda their whole lives for having difficulty taking off the blinders.)
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    A short trip to American where I was able to consume and notice the propaganda content of "both sides" of the media helped me realize the propaganda in my own. It's very difficult indeed to step outside the box.
souprock 6y ago
Right before the virus hit, unemployment was hitting record lows. (various unemployment records being about half a century old) The pay, adjusted for inflation, was starting to creep upward in a way that it hadn't for many years. If that isn't "really bringing back American jobs", how else would you judge it?
- VBprogrammer 6y ago
  Apologies if I'm misrepresenting your point of view here; it sounds to me like you feel Trump was behind these improvements in the metrics. What changes which he implemented do you feel where behind these improvements? If I posited the idea that he was simply riding a wave of positive economic progress established under the Obama administration, how would you counter that?
  - souprock 6y ago
    1. Regulations were severely cut. Those choke the life out of American business, making it uncompetitive. Maybe you like some of the regulations, but they have costs. Those costs aren't very visible to most people, because most people aren't trying to run a business, but they are huge. 2. Imports from less-regulated low-cost places like China were impacted by tariffs, favoring American workers. Retaliatory tariffs were largely unsuccessful.
    - VBprogrammer 6y ago
      Perhaps you are right on regulation but it is not clear that it has moved either of the metrics you mentioned. Looking at unemployment there is no deviation from the established trend during Trump's years in office. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-unemployment-rate.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-une... Wage growth is more complex. However, this too doesn't seem to be immediately correlated with Trump's policies. > During Obama’s last four years in office the average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers went up 4.9% https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/are-wages-rising-or-flat/ https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/are-wages-rising-or-flat/

akiselev 6y ago

You've fallen for the trap of the 2d political spectrum. It isn't about bias, it is about intent. MSNBC, CNN, etc are capitalist enterprises biased towards revenue and clicks - it's in their DNA. FOX was created explicitly by Ailes and Murdoch to prevent a second Nixon style teardown of the GOP. It's the reason Disney wanted absolutely nothing to do with the news arm when it acquired the rest of the Fox media empire - it's a capitalist enterprise only in the sense that it's profitable as a side effect of their main goal.

core-questions 6y ago
> You've fallen for the trap of the 2d political spectrum. You mean the meme-graph one? Don't think so. Every time I take a quiz based on that it lands me near the center, yet I don't resonate with any self-proclaimed centrist I've talked to. > FOX was created explicitly by Ailes and Murdoch to prevent a second Nixon style teardown of the GOP. I don't think the intent decades ago particularly matters compared with their actions presently, which are as aimed (at the level of the individual Fox employee) towards revenue and clicks as anyone - just going after a different market niche than MSNBC et al. The ownership is going after propaganda and narrative control, of course; the whole point of what I am saying is that both sides are doing that. > it's a capitalist enterprise only in the sense that it's profitable as a side effect of their main goal. The fact that you can't see that that's true of the other side of the media is very telling. WaPo and friends lose money every year, but will never, ever be shut down. What could the reason for that be, other than to use it as a propaganda mouthpiece? Honestly. If you can turn on an MSM network right now and not hear the propaganda baked into every sentence, you need to turn off all media, read some old books, disconnect for a few months, and come back when you have a perspective wide enough to realize that both sides are being harmed, and having their animosity aimed at one another, rather than at anyone who is actually doing the harm. (This may be easier for me to see as a non-American, of course. I shouldn't blame someone who has been soaking in yank propaganda their whole lives for having difficulty taking off the blinders.)
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  A short trip to American where I was able to consume and notice the propaganda content of "both sides" of the media helped me realize the propaganda in my own. It's very difficult indeed to step outside the box.

souprock 6y ago

Right before the virus hit, unemployment was hitting record lows. (various unemployment records being about half a century old) The pay, adjusted for inflation, was starting to creep upward in a way that it hadn't for many years. If that isn't "really bringing back American jobs", how else would you judge it?

VBprogrammer 6y ago
Apologies if I'm misrepresenting your point of view here; it sounds to me like you feel Trump was behind these improvements in the metrics. What changes which he implemented do you feel where behind these improvements? If I posited the idea that he was simply riding a wave of positive economic progress established under the Obama administration, how would you counter that?
- souprock 6y ago
  1. Regulations were severely cut. Those choke the life out of American business, making it uncompetitive. Maybe you like some of the regulations, but they have costs. Those costs aren't very visible to most people, because most people aren't trying to run a business, but they are huge. 2. Imports from less-regulated low-cost places like China were impacted by tariffs, favoring American workers. Retaliatory tariffs were largely unsuccessful.
  - VBprogrammer 6y ago
    Perhaps you are right on regulation but it is not clear that it has moved either of the metrics you mentioned. Looking at unemployment there is no deviation from the established trend during Trump's years in office. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-unemployment-rate.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-une... Wage growth is more complex. However, this too doesn't seem to be immediately correlated with Trump's policies. > During Obama’s last four years in office the average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers went up 4.9% https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/are-wages-rising-or-flat/ https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/are-wages-rising-or-flat/