3 ms·
It has to be owned by someone, that does not make it agenda driven. Who would you rather have it owned by so that it is not agenda driven?
by chirau 2y ago
It has to be owned by someone, that does not make it agenda driven. Who would you rather have it owned by so that it is not agenda driven?
- CPLX 2y agoIt’s not a hypothetical we aren’t assuming spherical cows today. Those specific people have a long and public track record that answers this question. It’s not a secret, like I said. There are plenty of editors out there who have never decided to concoct ludicrous stories of Al Queda bases in the Amazon to name one example. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/10/28/in-the-party-of-god-2 https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/10/28/in-the-party-o...
- chirau 2y agoyou still have not answered my question... who should own that you will believe it is impartial? Should I assume bias and impartiality for your Day One conference simply by who you are and who is behind you? The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, your opinion on that?
- CPLX 2y agoMy own involvement in media is not impartial and is not intended to be. My opinion on your question is that Jeff Bezos purchased the Washington Post to advance his interests, and that the Washington Post indeed has an agenda which is broadly aligned with what’s commonly referred to as “the establishment.” And absolutely nothing I’m saying is particularly insightful or controversial, it’s obvious at a glance. As for your original question about who should own media to make it objective, I don’t have the answer to that one. But I do know that there’s no person with a billion dollars who doesn’t have the agenda of preserving a social order consistent with them being able to continue to enjoy that billion dollars.