3 ms·

Journalists these days are generally not hired for their incredulity. They're hired based on a track record of not deviating from their employer's political and

Journalists these days are generally not hired for their incredulity. They're hired based on a track record of not deviating from their employer's political and financial priorities, regardless of the evidence. These are businesses, not public services. They owe their existence to dishonest and manipulative presentations of the qualities of third-party products that they sandwich between their own content. Lets go back to the days where media outlets were open about their editorial stances, rather than hiding them behind a veil of white-coated objectivity. Propagandists should stop pretending to be doctors, and just be honest propagandists. Putting it all on Democrats isn't completely fair, although I get how bitter Silver is that they sanctified him when he told them what they wanted to hear and condemned him when the data pointed the other way. It could have just as easily been the Republicans in control of those institutions now if the party weren't so hostile to minorities. That hostility cut them off from dominance of the nonprofit sector, which serves to convert the money of governments (i.e. the will of elected officials) and oligarchs into media messages. They're stuck with thinktanks and veteran's organizations, although they sometimes find openings in patient's rights nonprofits (run by pharmaceutical companies.)

jimbokun 3y ago
The Republicans absolutely have their own media organizations, just as likely to get the facts wrong in a way that's biased towards Republican interests. It's just that the expectations are so low for them no one is surprised when they report things with an obvious slant or just factually wrong.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  > The Republicans absolutely have their own media organizations Everybody has their own media organizations. > just as likely to get the facts wrong in a way that's biased towards Republican interests. This is both the law of averages, and also not relevant even if you had a good reason for saying it. I'm not saying the Republicans are any more honest than the Democrats (god forbid.) The Democrats are generally pushing for the same policies as the Republicans, except in matters that split their bases; we're still living in Reagan's world. Democrats are dominant now because they control nonprofits that are funded by the government and because they are supported by more billionaires. No other reason. 20 years from now it could be the Republicans in that position. It isn't like they don't have the ability; their takeover of state governments and redistricting is basically the same sort of tactic.
  - enragedcacti 3y ago
    > and because they are supported by more billionaires. No other reason. If we take the 2022 House races, republican's House PAC received $79 million from 42 billionaires or their spouses, while democrat's House PAC received only $20 million from 17 billionaires or their spouses. The numbers might play a little differently if you look at all donations to party affiliated PACs and individual campaigns but it doesn't seem like it reverses the overall trend. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdurot/article/meet-the-billionaires-funding-the-battle-for-control-of-the-house-of-representatives/?sh=1415681424c9 https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdurot/article/meet-the-bill... https://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-billionaires-political-spending-overwhelmingly-153200234.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-billionaires-politic...
  - stubybubs 3y ago
    >The Democrats are generally pushing for the same policies as the Republicans, except in matters that split their bases; we're still living in Reagan's world. I don't think this is true anymore. See what Lina Khan was appointed to do and is doing with the FTC. It's the first step in a long road of undoing decades of Reaganism. https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/14/making-good-trouble/#the-peoples-champion https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/14/making-good-trouble/#the-...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
no_butterscotch 3y ago
Yes additionally journalists are a sort of priestly caste in our secular society. I'm personally not a fan as there's a lot of self-anointed representation by journos: "We're the voice of the people!" No you are not my voice! You are not elected! You are the voice of advertisers, your business and your political interests!
- SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
  WaPo runs “Democracy dies in darkness” while parroting the absolute lie that was Hunter Biden’s laptop was “Russian Dissinformation”… that imo takes extra arrogance beyond just “we’re the voice of the people” or CNN’s “This might be illegal for you to read but we can because we are trained journalists”.
  - meowface 3y ago
    I don't believe WaPo ever claimed that. They wrote this in October 2020: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/24/hunter-biden-laptop-disinformation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/24/hunter-bid... >Insisting that the Hunter Biden laptop is fake is a trap. So is insisting that it’s real. That's not saying it's Russian disinformation. Just that it's unconfirmed to be either disinformation or real. (Which, at the time, was the correct assessment.)
    - SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
      That’s fun that after their initial reporting [0] they left some wiggle room out while saying that it couldn’t possibly be verified except for all the ways it was verified long after the election. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hunter-joe-biden-emails/2020/10/14/2740c702-0e4c-11eb-8074-0e943a91bf08_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hunter-joe-biden-ema... The initial reporting days earlier didn’t use the exact phrase “Russian Disinformation” it did take a least half a dozen times say Russian Intelligence.

jimbokun 3y ago

The Republicans absolutely have their own media organizations, just as likely to get the facts wrong in a way that's biased towards Republican interests. It's just that the expectations are so low for them no one is surprised when they report things with an obvious slant or just factually wrong.

pessimizer 3y ago
> The Republicans absolutely have their own media organizations Everybody has their own media organizations. > just as likely to get the facts wrong in a way that's biased towards Republican interests. This is both the law of averages, and also not relevant even if you had a good reason for saying it. I'm not saying the Republicans are any more honest than the Democrats (god forbid.) The Democrats are generally pushing for the same policies as the Republicans, except in matters that split their bases; we're still living in Reagan's world. Democrats are dominant now because they control nonprofits that are funded by the government and because they are supported by more billionaires. No other reason. 20 years from now it could be the Republicans in that position. It isn't like they don't have the ability; their takeover of state governments and redistricting is basically the same sort of tactic.
- enragedcacti 3y ago
  > and because they are supported by more billionaires. No other reason. If we take the 2022 House races, republican's House PAC received $79 million from 42 billionaires or their spouses, while democrat's House PAC received only $20 million from 17 billionaires or their spouses. The numbers might play a little differently if you look at all donations to party affiliated PACs and individual campaigns but it doesn't seem like it reverses the overall trend. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdurot/article/meet-the-billionaires-funding-the-battle-for-control-of-the-house-of-representatives/?sh=1415681424c9 https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdurot/article/meet-the-bill... https://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-billionaires-political-spending-overwhelmingly-153200234.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/american-billionaires-politic...
- stubybubs 3y ago
  >The Democrats are generally pushing for the same policies as the Republicans, except in matters that split their bases; we're still living in Reagan's world. I don't think this is true anymore. See what Lina Khan was appointed to do and is doing with the FTC. It's the first step in a long road of undoing decades of Reaganism. https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/14/making-good-trouble/#the-peoples-champion https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/14/making-good-trouble/#the-...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

no_butterscotch 3y ago

Yes additionally journalists are a sort of priestly caste in our secular society. I'm personally not a fan as there's a lot of self-anointed representation by journos: "We're the voice of the people!" No you are not my voice! You are not elected! You are the voice of advertisers, your business and your political interests!

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
WaPo runs “Democracy dies in darkness” while parroting the absolute lie that was Hunter Biden’s laptop was “Russian Dissinformation”… that imo takes extra arrogance beyond just “we’re the voice of the people” or CNN’s “This might be illegal for you to read but we can because we are trained journalists”.
- meowface 3y ago
  I don't believe WaPo ever claimed that. They wrote this in October 2020: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/24/hunter-biden-laptop-disinformation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/24/hunter-bid... >Insisting that the Hunter Biden laptop is fake is a trap. So is insisting that it’s real. That's not saying it's Russian disinformation. Just that it's unconfirmed to be either disinformation or real. (Which, at the time, was the correct assessment.)
  - SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
    That’s fun that after their initial reporting [0] they left some wiggle room out while saying that it couldn’t possibly be verified except for all the ways it was verified long after the election. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hunter-joe-biden-emails/2020/10/14/2740c702-0e4c-11eb-8074-0e943a91bf08_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hunter-joe-biden-ema... The initial reporting days earlier didn’t use the exact phrase “Russian Disinformation” it did take a least half a dozen times say Russian Intelligence.