TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

The American Press Is Destroying Itself

489 pointsby cjbestalmost 5 years ago

56 comments

BiteCode_devalmost 5 years ago
I don&#x27;t think they are.<p>I think they are optimizing for survival.<p>Serious news is expensive, and at this point, a niche market. Few people would consume it (or even be capable of doing so), even fewer are ready to pay the real price of it.<p>So they did the next best thing: they changed to please the market in a way that makes money. Grabbing a lot of attention, as cheaply as possible, so that you can sell it to the highest bidder.<p>You think it is self destroying, but only if you see it as from the point of view of a body that should inform people. But as a group that needs to survive, it&#x27;s a working strategy. Certainly easier to implement than finding a novel way to survive doing the right thing.<p>Infortunaly, this will lead to suffering for the entire society. But that&#x27;s the way our economical system work. It assumes that the markets balances things out. Unfortunatly, the common good is not something most individuals prioritize, or even conceptualize, when buying things. Often, they actually can&#x27;t, because their survival depend on more pressing day-to-day matters.
评论 #23513024 未加载
评论 #23512767 未加载
评论 #23512881 未加载
评论 #23514855 未加载
评论 #23509797 未加载
评论 #23512846 未加载
评论 #23513906 未加载
评论 #23513369 未加载
评论 #23515169 未加载
评论 #23518938 未加载
评论 #23512736 未加载
评论 #23517671 未加载
评论 #23513125 未加载
评论 #23516021 未加载
评论 #23513035 未加载
评论 #23509712 未加载
评论 #23514408 未加载
TheAdamAndChealmost 5 years ago
For those in the comments that haven&#x27;t read the article, I highly recommend you check it out. While the comments are talking about the survival of news media and &quot;tone-deaf&quot; titles, the bulk of the article is about the Overton window[1] shifting to the point where rigerous journalism questioning outrages of the time is becoming untenable, weakening the news overall. It&#x27;s a very good read.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Overton_window?wprov=sfla1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Overton_window?wprov=sfla1</a>
评论 #23514166 未加载
评论 #23514449 未加载
评论 #23514489 未加载
AnimalMuppetalmost 5 years ago
Thing is, when the New York Times was &quot;the newspaper of record&quot;, everyone read it. When they only print what will pass muster with the howling mob, for fear of losing their jobs if they offend, then only the howling mob will read it. But the howling mob doesn&#x27;t have enough members to support the New York Times.<p>That is, catering to the most vocal segment of the Right Thinkers is a ticket to an ever-shrinking readership, because 1) everyone who isn&#x27;t a card-carrying member of the Right Thinkers leaves, and 2) the Right Thinkers shrinks as the majority repeatedly throws out people for not being right thinking enough.
评论 #23506738 未加载
评论 #23506701 未加载
评论 #23515082 未加载
scott_salmost 5 years ago
Counterpoint, from Ezra Klein of Vox (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;6&#x2F;10&#x2F;21284651&#x2F;new-york-times-tom-cotton-media-liberal-conservative-black-lives-matter" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;6&#x2F;10&#x2F;21284651&#x2F;new-york-times-tom-co...</a>):<p>&gt; <i>There have always been boundaries around acceptable discourse, and the media has always been involved, in a complex and often unacknowledged way, in both enforcing and contesting them. In 1986, the media historian Daniel Hallin argued that journalists treat ideas as belonging to three spheres, each of which is governed by different rules of coverage. There’s the “sphere of consensus,” in which agreement is assumed. There’s the “sphere of deviance,” in which a view is considered universally repugnant, and it need not be entertained. And then, in the middle, is the “sphere of legitimate controversy,” wherein journalists are expected to cover all sides, and op-ed pages to represent all points of view.</i>
评论 #23509648 未加载
评论 #23509574 未加载
评论 #23509954 未加载
评论 #23509619 未加载
评论 #23509603 未加载
remote_phonealmost 5 years ago
This is the most important story in the last 4 years. The press has gone wild. They think they have a moral duty to bring down Trump instead of reporting the news. Because of this they distort headlines and flat out lie in many instances.<p>I no longer trust the media. I hate Trump as well, but you don’t do it through lies and distortion. You do it by presenting the truth. Reporters have crossed the line in the last several years and it shows. They are the worst propaganda machine in decades since the 80s and it truly is destroying itself, like Taibbi says.
评论 #23510156 未加载
评论 #23509966 未加载
评论 #23510288 未加载
rb808almost 5 years ago
The content of &#x27;Buildings Matter Too&#x27; article is worth reading, if you haven&#x27;t seen it you definitely should. To me the editor resigning is not good.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.inquirer.com&#x2F;columnists&#x2F;floyd-protest-center-city-philadelphia-lootings-52nd-street-walnut-chestnut-street-20200601.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.inquirer.com&#x2F;columnists&#x2F;floyd-protest-center-cit...</a>
评论 #23514734 未加载
评论 #23514996 未加载
gfodoralmost 5 years ago
Taibbi at this point should start a new news co. He, and to some degree, Glenn Greenwald, have been the only two members of the press who seem to be unable to see the emperor’s new clothes in the parades of the last several years.
评论 #23512423 未加载
评论 #23509689 未加载
评论 #23514688 未加载
评论 #23509634 未加载
评论 #23509631 未加载
shiadoalmost 5 years ago
Looking back reading Manufacturing Consent at a young age was one of the most important things I did. It sets you up for a liberating life of zero expectations for media.
评论 #23509744 未加载
blickentwapftalmost 5 years ago
I’m getting to the point of just switching off.<p>Whatever your opinion, there will be many others who deeply and vehemently disagree with you and do so with passionate, fiery, certain-to-be-correct righteous indignation.<p>Carry your true opinions in your head and share them with no one.
评论 #23513927 未加载
评论 #23513625 未加载
评论 #23513779 未加载
评论 #23513070 未加载
评论 #23514696 未加载
评论 #23515058 未加载
评论 #23509945 未加载
aww_dangalmost 5 years ago
&gt;I always question, why does a Black life matter only when a white man takes it?... Like, if a white man takes my life tonight, it’s going to be national news, but if a Black man takes my life, it might not even be spoken of… It’s stuff just like that that I just want in the mix.<p>Because the dominant media narrative has a fetishized view of violence, racism and victimhood. Combine this with their overarching savior complex. If they were genuinely concerned, they wouldn&#x27;t silence this man. Logical consistency has no place in this emotionally charged environment. The loudest voices don&#x27;t care about their hypocrisy. They want to score political points at any cost. Divisive identity politics, feel-good-guilt-projection, blame games, no price is too high when it comes to partisan politics.<p>I expect this to continue and intensify as we approach the November elections.
评论 #23511114 未加载
评论 #23510985 未加载
williamsmjalmost 5 years ago
If this is your introduction to Matt Taibbi, it&#x27;s worth knowing he has a dog in the race when it comes to &quot;cancel culture&quot;: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;outlook&#x2F;the-two-expat-bros-who-terrorized-women-correspondents-in-moscow&#x2F;2017&#x2F;12&#x2F;15&#x2F;91ff338c-ca3c-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;outlook&#x2F;the-two-expat-bros-wh...</a>.
评论 #23513836 未加载
braindead_inalmost 5 years ago
First, they came for the journalists and nobody knows what happened next.
Shivetyaalmost 5 years ago
What I find most reprehensible about this whole situation is that more and more members of the left regulate political discourse, no make that any discourse, by defining any opposing view as illegitimate, bigoted, and now violence.<p>As in, they are taking the position that their moral superiority is without question and anyone who does not ascribe to this has no rights and we are nearing the point of the same having no protection from retribution of any sort.<p>I seriously doubt people understand what is happening to their rights because if this type of moral superiority takes hold you will be on the receiving end more often than not. Welcome to 1984.
评论 #23509951 未加载
评论 #23511170 未加载
评论 #23510043 未加载
评论 #23510089 未加载
评论 #23509924 未加载
评论 #23512529 未加载
评论 #23514880 未加载
peter303almost 5 years ago
Conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan was separated from New York Magazine. He quickly found a platform in other magazine. While I disagree with Andrew a lot, I dont think he should have been censored.
评论 #23512607 未加载
JPKabalmost 5 years ago
I love Taibbi. He is fearless and pays the price for pointing out groupthink.
评论 #23506698 未加载
maps7almost 5 years ago
On a side note, does anyone subscribe to any good news&#x2F;information site? I would like to subscribe to something good and know I&#x27;m supporting it.
评论 #23513685 未加载
评论 #23513235 未加载
评论 #23514119 未加载
评论 #23513622 未加载
phpdragonalmost 5 years ago
Parallels to McCarthyism anyone?
infogulchalmost 5 years ago
The US seems to have fallen into a game-theoretic local minimum where each party lets their crazy cousin go throw dumb rocks at the opposition because it seems to be the optimal way to drum up fanatic support for their side, all the while whistling as if in ignorance of what&#x27;s going on. At least that&#x27;s how it seemed to start, now it&#x27;s just devolved to outright scat slinging that&#x27;s co-opted our system of government into a soap opera. It would almost be funny if the poo slingers weren&#x27;t the very people that make and enforce the laws that we all have to live by.<p>Our political parties need to <i>clean their damn houses</i>. It&#x27;s not the right&#x27;s job to deal with the radical left, and it&#x27;s not the left&#x27;s job to deal with the radical right. Both sides need to take out their trash so we can actually get something done.<p>We need a way to argue against a steelman opposing argument instead of always a strawman. We need to be capable of updating our opinions without risking career suicide. We need something that allows us to deal with the meta problems like fallacies and trolls and half-refutations paraded around as victories. We need to be able to hold arguments with <i>depth</i> and <i>nuance</i>.
评论 #23507751 未加载
评论 #23510003 未加载
评论 #23512127 未加载
评论 #23509921 未加载
评论 #23513641 未加载
评论 #23507014 未加载
评论 #23513133 未加载
评论 #23512800 未加载
aSplash0fDerpalmost 5 years ago
This is another clear example of 20th century scale.<p>They made everything &quot;so big&quot;, that they have to fill the pipeline with inferior products&#x2F;drivel just to keep it at capacity.<p>21st century scale doesn&#x27;t suffer from the same weakness, but that should come as no surprise.
jgwil2almost 5 years ago
The Chait article[0] Taibbi cites may be a slightly more effective version of a similar argument, not least because he goes to a good deal of trouble to emphasize how much worse the problem is on the political right.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;intelligencer&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;case-for-liberalism-tom-cotton-new-york-times-james-bennet.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;nymag.com&#x2F;intelligencer&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;case-for-liberalism-...</a>
评论 #23507001 未加载
itchyjunkalmost 5 years ago
Expression and suppression of ideas have been happening ever since the onset of language in human, as far as I can tell. Any explanation that is time dependent, i.e this is happening because of so and so happening currently seems a bit inadequate to me. Any type of &quot;look how crazy the other side is&quot; rhetoric also feels like cliche to me because who am I do decide what&#x27;s insane and what not?<p>As for the core of the problem itself, I have no idea what the core of the problem is. Vaguely, it seems that people take a side of issue that&#x27;s phrased to have two side and they duke it out with the other side. It seem to be part of underlying mechanism of how humans behave because I see similar ideas played out in sports and such.<p>Maybe the problem isn&#x27;t any one specific idea but rather how ideas get parsed by our brain. Or maybe I am the one complicating things and it&#x27;s a simpler idea. But this whole business of right or wrong ideas, sides, values etc seems exhaustive. I&#x27;ll just wait for someone else to figure it out for me.
remotistsalmost 5 years ago
I would highly recommend his 2019 book Hate Inc.
yellowbuildingalmost 5 years ago
Taibbi is one of the best journalists in America. Very thankful to have people like him doing this.
评论 #23509611 未加载
incangoldalmost 5 years ago
A further discussion of some of the details. If true Taibbi&#x27;s piece loses some of its sting: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.currentaffairs.org&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;has-the-american-left-lost-its-mind" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.currentaffairs.org&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;has-the-american-left...</a><p>I don&#x27;t agree with all the opinions in this article. But it would be good to understand better what the actual facts are. Too tired to dig further myself, and that&#x27;s the problem, isn&#x27;t it? But maybe someone else can already set things straight?
komali2almost 5 years ago
American Television has been been held hostage since the 70s by the &quot;American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property,&quot; it&#x27;s not like this is new or unique to leftists.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;American_Society_for_the_Defense_of_Tradition,_Family_and_Property" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;American_Society_for_the_Defen...</a>
roenxialmost 5 years ago
I think this piece rambles on against the far-left a bit to much to be useful.<p>The political dialogue is currently in territory that is Important. Normal families are under significant financial pressures, the legitimacy of major institutions (police, presidential elections, government solvency) is open to questioning. Global conditions are tense, let alone America&#x27;s internal problems.<p>This is a time for sober discussion of the issues, not calling people &quot;great reality-show villain&quot; or &quot;Twitter Robespierres&quot;.<p>There is a real problem that the atmosphere on the left is stifling alternative ideas for one, ironically experimental, orthodoxy. That needs to be discussed. Lots of other issues also need to be discussed.<p>And answering the headline; I fully expect all the narratives in all major US press outlets to be proven false at some point in the future. What passes for &#x27;good journalism&#x27; these days is being vaguely correct about what the issues are. I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if not a single quote from a political figure has been presented in context in the last 2 years. I refuse to believe anything in the media about who said what without cross-referencing against a primary source. It is impossible to have an honest political discussion in that environment.
评论 #23511940 未加载
评论 #23506720 未加载
mudlusalmost 5 years ago
This wouldn&#x27;t be a problem if Section 230 was repealed<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aclu.org&#x2F;issues&#x2F;free-speech&#x2F;internet-speech&#x2F;communications-decency-act-section-230" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.aclu.org&#x2F;issues&#x2F;free-speech&#x2F;internet-speech&#x2F;comm...</a>
评论 #23514952 未加载
ssalazaralmost 5 years ago
I have read many of Taibbi&#x27;s past articles with enthusiasm and he makes some interesting arguments in the present article, but to be clear, he has an axe to grind on this very issue. He himself was essentially cancelled for some pretty indefensible and egregious &quot;journalism&quot; early in his career.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;outlook&#x2F;the-two-expat-bros-who-terrorized-women-correspondents-in-moscow&#x2F;2017&#x2F;12&#x2F;15&#x2F;91ff338c-ca3c-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;outlook&#x2F;the-two-expat-bros-wh...</a><p>Furthermore, hes engaged here in some light cherry-picking. For instance, Taibbi references a called-out UCLA professor, who is white, and whose primary offense seems to not be reading MLK&#x27;s treatise but using the n-word in the process- that seems like a detail worth mentioning?
mark_l_watsonalmost 5 years ago
I read this yesterday, superb analysis.<p>I pay $5&#x2F;month to Taibbi to get email updates. This one had a note that it could be shared.<p>Press is now just a business to make money and to occasionally push agendas on the owners’ wishes.
Budalmost 5 years ago
In addition to the lies I listed in my other comment, Taibbi also lies about what he calls the &quot;now-discredited Steele dossier&quot; in this piece.<p>Here are the facts: not a single significant conclusion in the Steele dossier has <i>ever been discredited or proven false</i> to date. Not one.<p>Anyone who read Taibbi during the W Administration, and who reads him again now, can readily discern that someone got to him. It&#x27;s not the same guy. He&#x27;s flown off the handle and spouts readily-falsifiable information at a truly alarming rate. You can Google for 30 seconds and find lie after lie. It&#x27;s the same with Glenn Greenwald, who Taibbi is now allied with.
评论 #23514293 未加载
评论 #23514233 未加载
评论 #23514425 未加载
评论 #23514456 未加载
评论 #23514440 未加载
评论 #23514422 未加载
idealsalmost 5 years ago
Of the points the author is bringing up, all of them sound like comments that had they been made on here would be flagged and downvoted for &#x27;flame bait&#x27; because they are purposefully incendiary.<p>I don&#x27;t disagree. Some of the reactions have been over the top but everyone is pretty wound up right now.<p>I don&#x27;t think the editor of nyt opinion should be fired for running the Tom Cotton piece, but some real reflection of intent and purpose needed to be checked. Same with the reporter in Oakland.
评论 #23509976 未加载
intendedalmost 5 years ago
No shit. The American right showed the way. The left is finally optimizing to match the working model.
whearyoualmost 5 years ago
This was amazing. The fourth estate, news media is so important...
LockAndLolalmost 5 years ago
&gt; The American left has lost its mind<p>That quote stands out. For all the talk about demanding inclusiveness, American leftwings seem to be quite an exclusive group. They demand some conflicting moral standards and drown out debate by shouting down different opinions.<p>It&#x27;s quite disconcerting to see this jump over to Europe and spread in the fashion it has. Identity and group belonging are becoming more important than reason.
barkingcatalmost 5 years ago
I think the real idea is that America is destroying itself. Not just on the surface, but it&#x27;s like looking at a democratic will to self-un-democratize.
tptacekalmost 5 years ago
It&#x27;s a little rich seeing Matt Taibbi, of all people, raising the alarm about &quot;moral manias&quot;.
评论 #23513482 未加载
评论 #23512870 未加载
评论 #23512623 未加载
SZJXalmost 5 years ago
From an outsider&#x27;s (not living in the US) perspective, the adherence to identity politics there has really gone to the extremes. It is a paradox in itself: if every group emphasizes its uniqueness, its needs to be viewed, heard and treated differently from the status quo, then how would it be possible to arrive at an endgame of &quot;everybody being treated equally&quot;?<p>From an European perspective, identity politics is quite puzzling. In France for example, there is simply no item called &quot;ethnicity&quot; in the population census. As long as you&#x27;re &quot;French&quot;, you&#x27;re supposed to enjoy the same rights and have the same duties, and should be able to communicate with each other based on a fundamental set of values and cultural understanding. The idea of &quot;skin color&quot; is very much de-emphasized instead of strengthened, which IMO makes sense if you want to reach a true state of &quot;equality for all&quot;. In a sense it is similar to the idea of &quot;let us ignore the &#x27;sex&#x27; of a person when evaluating their abilities and agreeing on their duties, just treat all sexes as the same and equal, instead of arguing about which sex should enjoy more privileges on which fronts&quot;.<p>Of course, I understand that everything has historical and societal roots. The US society has always been divided along ethnic lines. After all, the vast amount of African Americans&#x27; sole purpose of existence, until less than 2 centuries ago, was to be slaves to a superior master class, not to mention the various comparisons between the US and Rome, even up to the present. Even after the liberation, the social-economic organizational structure hasn&#x27;t really changed. Of course, this is not to say that similar problems don&#x27;t exist in Europe. France also had a long history of colonization, and the group identity of Northern Africans is always a tricky issue in their society. However, in general, and especially in Northern European countries which didn&#x27;t get to partake in much colonization, for example, most migrants are relatively recent economic migrants. This makes it much harder for a historically discriminatory social-economic structure to form against them, and makes it quite easier for the society to de-emphasize the skin color and regard everybody equally as much as possible. Of course, there is still a long way to go before any form of racism truly doesn&#x27;t exist even in those countries, that&#x27;s for sure. I just feel that the current situation in the US is incredibly polarized, nobody is listening to what the others are talking about, and only insists on pushing their own narratives, which is just not conducive to eventually solving the problems. No matter whether you&#x27;re on the left or on the right, a dogmatic adherence to ideology and the need to bash anybody who in your eyes dares to think slightly differently is an extremely dangerous thing to do.
orsenthilalmost 5 years ago
As humans, we love to create and live in a humanistic world. The newspaper stances, which this article criticizes were trying to be human (for well-being of human in their best judgement, and with open motivation) at different points in time.<p>This article has serve as great whataboutism if you don&#x27;t the humanistic philosophy, while you are pursuing the truth.
krofoo9nnalmost 5 years ago
Former hero of mainstream journalism no longer fits in with mainstream journalism so of course it’s destroying itself.<p>Perhaps Matt Taibbi is used to being a visibly elite journalist who isn’t on board with a new status quo that won’t benefit him the same.<p>People are sick of yesterday’s politics and looking to remake things. The media is always going on about it’s important role in our political system. It needs a good kick in the ass.<p>Post post modernism has us deconstructing post modernism. No more believing we’re just detached observers living on rails. We aren’t feeling obligated to saying grandpa and grandma and are searching for a new normal from bottom up, as too many are facing existential entropy given the status quo.<p>Taibbi is ‘fraid that what was familiar is no more. Good. That means journalism is being disrupted in a real way. It’s not if it’s just feeling normal to the old experts.<p>Our social institutions may really be changing.
评论 #23514550 未加载
评论 #23514527 未加载
评论 #23515036 未加载
dilapalmost 5 years ago
Earlier thread: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=23505400" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=23505400</a>
评论 #23510285 未加载
whiddershinsalmost 5 years ago
The New Yorker depiction of this very site (or was it the Atlantic) was particularly egregious.
评论 #23509633 未加载
评论 #23509717 未加载
评论 #23509608 未加载
评论 #23510072 未加载
评论 #23512738 未加载
IG_Semmelweissalmost 5 years ago
He touches on the symptoms but barely figures out the disease.<p>The problem is that elites and institutions have been stripped naked.<p>When the printing press was invented, no one could have foreseen that the tsunami of information could have undermined the catholic institutions to such an extent, that it would lead to a devastating conflict ( 30 years war) fought over the pretext of very minor religios diffferences.<p>But to anyone paying attention, the underlying current was there: the general populace had been profoundly dissilutioned by the elites, with the information tide leaving the elites stripped naked at the beach.<p>Fast forward to the 1980s and the internet.<p>The tsunami of information has come again, and left every institution and elite exposed.<p>From the top down, presidents (&quot;wmd&#x27;s in Iraq&quot;, hillary&#x27;s &quot;deplorables&quot; and &quot;tell 1 thing to bankers and something else to public&quot; ), senators (&quot;pocahontas&quot; story), reporters (&quot;under enemy fire while reporting&quot;, sex scandals) or NYTs &quot;Fake but real&quot; headline apology, institutions (FBIs &quot;collusion&quot;), academia like medicine (lancet &quot;covid report&quot;), or economics &quot;2008 no one could have foreseen coming&quot;, all the way down to mayors and councilmen.<p>We see failures and lack of respect in every corner of elites.<p>The tide has left the lies and manipulation of every institution naked.<p>We must hope that more people like taibbi realize this, and move quickly to descentralize power from old institutions because the other solution is to burn everything down and that usually turns out much worse.
idownvotedalmost 5 years ago
&gt; <i>It feels liberating to say after years of tiptoeing around the fact, but the American left has lost its mind</i><p>I add to that, that without that deviation from reality, a candidate like Trump would have never gotten his nomination, even less the presidency.
gameswithgoalmost 5 years ago
Is the left losing their minds of their own accord? Or are people becoming more reactionary due to the unprecedented level of insanity that the right has displayed and wielded with actual political power of late? Calls for liberals to be be rational when a trump administration rules the country is a bit odd, since reasoned debate does no good there, or with the current GOP senate. what is left? throw a fit is about all that is left.
评论 #23515097 未加载
评论 #23514607 未加载
xg15almost 5 years ago
&gt; <i>I always question, why does a Black life matter only when a white man takes it?...</i><p>I mean, Lacy does have a point that this kind of question in the context of the protests is nothing more than distracting.<p>The protests are about <i>systematic</i> discrimination of black people. No one questioned that black people can also be perpetrators - it&#x27;s just irrelevant to the topic at hand.<p>Would nazis running concentration camps be absolved by finding that &quot;well but some inmates commit violence too&quot;?
评论 #23513312 未加载
评论 #23513530 未加载
评论 #23513277 未加载
评论 #23513345 未加载
Tenokealmost 5 years ago
Great article but it&#x27;s so depressing that it starts with disinformation by claiming Trump said it is a great day for Floyd due to unemployment numbers (actually discussed completely separately in that speech). He said it&#x27;s a great day due to increasing equality. [0]<p>Twisting someone&#x27;s words to make them look worse in a piece that rightly blames others for doing so is just sad. So I am asking again - Why do even the sensible ones do this? Why can&#x27;t we have some honesty and objectivity?<p>0. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rev.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;transcripts&#x2F;donald-trump-press-conference-transcript-on-jobs-report" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rev.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;transcripts&#x2F;donald-trump-press-conf...</a>
评论 #23509660 未加载
评论 #23509659 未加载
sqldbaalmost 5 years ago
This looks a lot like a racist piece to me.
zarkov99almost 5 years ago
And it is destroying the country. The death of Floyd was no doubt a hideous crime, which should be punished harshly but the narrative of systemic and widespread police racism is unsupported by data and incredibly, irresponsibly manufactured by the media. We are close to a civil war, in the middle of a pandemic, we are all out of our minds with rage and indignation and, for the most part things were better than ever, including the level of police brutality. I beg all of you, do not let yourself be manipulated, no matter how righteous it might feel. Check the actual facts. More whites are killed by police than blacks, in absolute terms as well as per crime committed [1]. Sam Harris discusses all of this in his latest podcast, just hear him out [2]. America is not perfect, for sure, there is still racism, for sure, and the police could do far better, for sure, but we are burning the country down in a middle of a plague, when we should be working together to solve all of this. And its largely the fault of the media.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statista.com&#x2F;statistics&#x2F;585152&#x2F;people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.statista.com&#x2F;statistics&#x2F;585152&#x2F;people-shot-to-de...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;podcasts.google.com&#x2F;feed&#x2F;aHR0cHM6Ly93YWtpbmd1cC5saWJzeW4uY29tL3Jzcw&#x2F;episode&#x2F;MWNhMjQ1MjItOWRmMS00ODMyLWIwMDMtMGFmODAzOTY2MTEy?hl=en&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjezI27iIDqAhW-TDABHf58DnMQieUEegQIAxAE&amp;ep=6" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;podcasts.google.com&#x2F;feed&#x2F;aHR0cHM6Ly93YWtpbmd1cC5saWJ...</a>
jtbaylyalmost 5 years ago
Moderators, it is disingenuous to mark this as [dupe] when in fact what you’ve done is [flag] silence the article—something that ironically enough proves its point.
评论 #23513043 未加载
MrZongle2almost 5 years ago
I knew to take the entire article with a grain of salt with the first sentence:<p><i>&quot;Sometimes it seems life can’t get any worse in this country.&quot;</i><p>Yes, there are astonishingly brash, illegal actions being taken by police departments. Yes, we&#x27;re still in the middle of a pandemic.<p>But that statement is absurd, and childish.
orwinalmost 5 years ago
This is a strategy to move politics acceptable lines: present extremely radical thinkers in the media, as editorialist, then the originally radical ones will seems moderate.<p>To be fair, the conservative started this, at least in France. Now the liberals adopted this around 2017, helping first the regular right then the &quot;center right&quot; getting elected when the regular right got caught red-handed stealing money (i&#x27;m simplifying here).<p>The communists use it now, it is only fair. And i hope anarchists will start too. That&#x27;s why i&#x27;m sneering at &quot;defund the police&quot;: it is not extreme enough. &quot;Abolish the police&quot; should have been the initial demands, with defunding an acceptable compromise. But anarchists are not organized enough to make good media strategies.
spicyramenalmost 5 years ago
What i found today in Academia, News and even Tech companies that question the left has resulted in banning but never in a civil discussion. Movements like Antifa, BLM won&#x27;t sit and have a talk because in principle they believe that speech and civil discussion hasnt led to any advancements in their political requests. While some of them apply to past times, today is important to have discussion and freedom of speech A good case is Cadence Owens, she is person that represents the right and when invited to Joe Rogan it was a joke that all her claims were not backed up with science, other example was Milo too. They were put in front of a very smart person and lose credibility on the spot. Is important to keep freedom of speech in all areas and with both left and right
Budalmost 5 years ago
&quot;The American press is destroying itself.&quot;<p>...says Matt Taibbi, who has <i>actually</i> been destroying himself and his reputation continuously for about 10 years now.<p>In this piece, Taibbi straight-up lies about the fascist op-ed from Tom Cotton in the NYT. I guess he thinks we&#x27;re all too stupid to notice when he completely skips over everything that made Cotton&#x27;s piece so offensive, including Sen. Cotton calling for &quot;no quarter&quot; against protestors, which is effectively state-sanctioned murder.<p>Taibbi also skips over the key problem with the now-fired NYT editor&#x27;s conduct: the fact that he admittedly <i>did not even read</i> Cotton&#x27;s op-ed before approving it.&quot;<p>There is a reasonable debate to be had over whether the Cotton op-ed should have been run or not, with many reasonable folks on both sides, but Taibbi&#x27;s take is one of the worst I&#x27;ve seen and does not honestly portray the issues involved.
claudeganonalmost 5 years ago
This honestly just reads to me like more media-class self absorption. How you manage to use the phrase “Twitter Robspierre” and then pivot to defending Cotton’s editorial on populist grounds is beyond me. I’m sure the guy managing the Olive Garden in Upper Arlington, Ohio is up at night worrying that the Times Op-Ed page is going to be taken over by the reincarnation of Danton.
ntsplnkv2almost 5 years ago
Might as well listen to Rush Limbaugh - you&#x27;ll get the same arguments, and the same lack of substance, as this article, but with far more entertainment.<p>In any case, the point he was trying to make is all well and good - the media should ask the tough questions and sometimes society impacts the flow of free thought. But it seems to Mr Taibbi only the left has this problem.
评论 #23506958 未加载
评论 #23506756 未加载
rickyplouisalmost 5 years ago
Before reading this I had a feeling it was related to the James Bennet situation at the Times. I&#x27;ve been following the narratives unfolding around news rooms and I would offer this article as a counter narrative to the one being portrayed in this piece.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;07&#x2F;business&#x2F;media&#x2F;new-york-times-washington-post-protests.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2020&#x2F;06&#x2F;07&#x2F;business&#x2F;media&#x2F;new-york-t...</a><p>If you look at the James Bennet situation specifically, he willingly published a piece that he said could be dangerous. He tweeted the following<p>&quot;We understand that many readers find Senator Cotton&#x27;s argument painful, even dangerous. We believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate.&quot;<p>While this sounds like a noble undertaking of the advancement of public discourse, black journalists have publicly condemned this act because it will put their lives in danger. The problem is that Bennet and many other journalists believe it is ok to push dangerous, even racist narratives in pursuit of &quot;objectivity&quot;. For many non-black journalists these debates are exciting and stimulating, but for black people these debates are validating toxic ideologies by giving them a platform to spread.
评论 #23513458 未加载