3 ms·
> traditional media I see this distinction made all of the time when this topic comes up. The mainstream media is untrustworthy. Corporate media has an agend
by flyingcircus3 5y ago
> traditional media
I see this distinction made all of the time when this topic comes up. The mainstream media is untrustworthy. Corporate media has an agenda. Legacy media is corrupt. These qualifiers all imply that there is some non-traditional, non-corporate, non-legacy media that does not have these problems. Yet whenever the people making these distinctions are asked who/what these superior alternatives are, the answers are always underwhelming, or outright laughable.
So who are these beacons of truth you allude by contrasting the "traditional" media?
- nonethewiser 5y agoLegacy/traditional/corporate/entrenched media has an outsized impact. There doesnt need to be some pure alternative in order to recognize that.
- flyingcircus3 5y agoIf there is no pure alternative, then these problems are not unique to legacy/traditional/corporate/entrenched media, and therefore have nothing to do with them being in the mainstream.
- double_nan 5y agoI'm not sure that there is such a beacon of truth you are looking for. May be that should be the resolution after all the dust settles.
- flyingcircus3 5y agoOf course there isn't! That's why its so preposterous to single out "traditional" media as the sole purveyors of falsehoods. Meanwhile, this other segment of the media is essentially a broken clock of bottomless cynicism and grievance airing, which somehow bears no blame for the erosion of trust.
- double_nan 5y agoI guess there was too much trust in the MSM at one point and what we see now is a 2 fold problem: 1. A hangover after the blind trust period 2. A degradation of MSM became obvious and opened a way for smaller outlets and citizen journalists.