3 ms·
There are obviously some extremely high profile incidents of journalists being forced to promote an ostensibly partisan view in recent times, but that's general
by somenameforme 2y ago
There are obviously some extremely high profile incidents of journalists being forced to promote an ostensibly partisan view in recent times, but that's generally only when the ownership flip flops on their views. And the reason for this is quite insidious. Knowing somebody's partisanship, biases, and other interests in pretty easy in modern times for people who like to be visible which is, more or less by definition, always true for journalists. So if you want bias [x] or partisanship [y], you simply only hire people of such partisanship or bias. So there's only a problem when you change your mind about the 'right' biases.
And I don't think there's any legacy media outlet that's really independent now a days. They've all gone hardcore partisan one way or the other, and all frame things in strong accordance with US geopolitical policy. For instance imagine how absurdly different the coverage would look if what was happening between Israel and Gaza was instead, otherwise identically, happening between China and Xinjiang (Uyghurs).
- vintermann 2y agoAs Chomsky famously told Andrew Marr, he may have been perfectly sincere in his beliefs, but he wouldn't be sitting where he was if he believed anything else. A while back, a semi-independent journalist, Nate Silver, said that Disney (who had bought his site) "almost never interfered in our editorial policy". Apparently oblivious to what that means: that Disney were perfectly willing to interfere with his editorial policy, but rarely had reason to.