3 ms·

> He's announced very recently that he wants to change it that way, which is all the proof anyone needs that it's not that way at the moment. Yes, we agree. Be

by mmooss 2y ago

> He's announced very recently that he wants to change it that way, which is all the proof anyone needs that it's not that way at the moment. Yes, we agree. Bezos wants to create false balance. Therefore it hasn't been there and people's complaints about it, at least in this context, are wrong. > The people within journalism are the problem he's trying to fix, so credibility with them doesn't matter. That sentence assumes Bezos claims are not only sincere - he's trying to improve journalism, not trying to censor journalism to serve Trump, Bezos' interests, and the right wing - and that his claims are accurate. Nobody is saying the Post's reporting on Trump was innacurate or not credible. Bezos wants to stop them from doing it.

mike_hearn 2y ago
I've read his op-ed and believe what he says is both sincere and accurate. > Nobody is saying the Post's reporting on Trump was innacurate or not credible People are in fact saying that and have been for years, which is why Bezos felt he had to intervene. There are people saying that in this very thread. Bezos left them alone for 10 years and the result has been massive drops in the proportion of people telling pollsters they trust journalism. He states clearly in his op-ed that this is why he is now intervening editorially at the WP: the staff's approach to being trusted has objectively failed (yes, there's that word again).
- mmooss 2y ago
  > People are in fact saying that and have been for years, which is why Bezos felt he had to intervene. That's not what Bezos said. He didn't say the reporting was innaccurate or not credible. > drops in the proportion of people telling pollsters they trust journalism If an ideological movement distrusts and attacks anything that disagrees with it, the solution isn't to appease it. Of course they will attack and 'distrust' anyone who criticizes Trump or violates their ideology; that's very clear.

by mmooss 2y ago

mike_hearn 2y ago

I've read his op-ed and believe what he says is both sincere and accurate. > Nobody is saying the Post's reporting on Trump was innacurate or not credible People are in fact saying that and have been for years, which is why Bezos felt he had to intervene. There are people saying that in this very thread. Bezos left them alone for 10 years and the result has been massive drops in the proportion of people telling pollsters they trust journalism. He states clearly in his op-ed that this is why he is now intervening editorially at the WP: the staff's approach to being trusted has objectively failed (yes, there's that word again).

mmooss 2y ago
> People are in fact saying that and have been for years, which is why Bezos felt he had to intervene. That's not what Bezos said. He didn't say the reporting was innaccurate or not credible. > drops in the proportion of people telling pollsters they trust journalism If an ideological movement distrusts and attacks anything that disagrees with it, the solution isn't to appease it. Of course they will attack and 'distrust' anyone who criticizes Trump or violates their ideology; that's very clear.