4 ms·
Citizen's United destroyed journalism by making it for profit propaganda for the wealthy, but its always been under attack. Journalism has always been under at
by webdoodle 1y ago
Citizen's United destroyed journalism by making it for profit propaganda for the wealthy, but its always been under attack.
Journalism has always been under attack from the wealthy robber barons of the time. Rockefeller famously bought out the magazine/newspaper that muckraker Ida Tarbell wrote for after she wrote a damning book about Standard Oil. However, it only hardened her and other muckrakers, who later led to the break up of Standard Oil, term limits, and other restrains on the abuse of power.
I find the parallels between then and now quite striking. Except today's boogeymen have rebranded and call themselves tech billionaires. They got ahead of muckrakers by owning journalism, media, and social media, and have used there Pinkertons (Trust and Safety Teams) to censoring anyone who speaks out against them.
There are good journalists out there though. I think a modern equivalent of Ida Tarbell may be Whitney Webb for writing One Nation under Blackmail about the Epstein Files.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ida_Tarbell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ida_Tarbell
https://unlimitedhangout.com/ https://unlimitedhangout.com/
- pessimizer 1y ago[flagged]
- astrange 1y agoYou might have forgotten what US healthcare was like before the ACA. The ACA was good. It successfully bent the cost curve and now you don't immediately get banned from health insurance for life if you get cancer. > Romneycare It's called that because the Democratic legislature forced him to pass it, not because he liked it.
- dragonwriter 1y agoIt was modeled fairly directly on a proposal drafted as a federal alternative to the Clinton healthcare plan by lobbyists for the insurance industry and embraced by Republican national leadership in that context (which they then stopped talking about once the Clinton plan went down in flames.)
- terminalshort 1y agoCitizens United has everything to do with journalism, but not in the way the comment you are replying to says. The CU case was over a film maker who released a political documentary and was banned from advertising it because those adds were political in nature and therefore banned by campaign finance laws. The court correctly ruled that the government had no power to regulate this because of freedom of the press.