I appreciate the thought you put into this. I would reiterate that we have plenty of examples of what happens when conservatives use their worldview as the yardstick for what passes as "objective" journalism. I saw it first-hand at one of the pioneers of this style of "journalism," The Washington Times, where I was a political reporter in the 1980s. I left the paper because I could no longer stomach being associated with news filtered through an agenda of advancing a right-wing worldview and set of politics.
Today we have outlets like the Sinclair chain of television stations and the indirectly connected Baltimore Sun, owned by Sinclair CEO David Smith. New York magazine has an excellent article on how The Sun and Sinclair's Baltimore and D.C. outlets are being weaponized against Maryland Gov. Wes Moore. A legitimate news story about discrepancies between what Moore has said about his military record and the actual details of his service is being blown out of porportion in a way that appears designed to "Swift-boat" any 2028 presidential aspirations Moore might have. This is way more ham-handed than most of what the Bari Weiss crew at CBS might do at 60 Minutes (or is it?), but it is very much the logical extension of the presumption that journalists holding up a mirror to a complex world and revealing what's lurking in the world's dark corners is somehow "liberal bias" and "not reporting the news" because the result might leave people less persuaded that conservative opinions and the people who hold them are correct.
I am not fooled by Bari Weiss and the Ellisons propagandist overhaul of CBS, and I bet most Stephen Colbert lovers aren't either. Right wing state regime media has infiltrated all legacy networks, and any freedom loving American knowing this has shut it off. For 50 years I watched CBS evening news, 60 minutes, Sunday Morning, sitcoms and late night. But I don't anymore. So I cancelled my Direct TV and threw out the cable box. I don't need fascist lies invading my living room. Nice piece of writing, by the way.
“Readers lose when journalists take it upon themselves (and call upon others) to imagine it out of existence for the sake of “persuasion.””
This is the truth and a it’s a massive problem thanks to the rights takeover of everything. ‘Persuasion’ should never even be considered if you’re an actual journalist. Anything that’s beyond reporting straight facts is opinion (or propaganda or influencing) and should be clearly labeled as so.
Including conservative philosophies might be defensible if there were such things. Currently there is just a hodgepodge of positions designed to favor people of means and to hell with everybody else, e.g. socialism/bailouts for the corporations, bootstraps for the poor and middle class.
I suspect 60 Minutes will devolve into a very bad version of Firing Line (which, in fact, is a pretty decent show on its own terms which the host makes no effort to disguise).
Excellent Brian, "The influencer’s objective, as he describes it, is this: Try to persuade people with opposing views that they are wrong, or that they have blindspots, by first flattering their collective sense of righteousness, then chipping away at it. Understand why they believe what they believe (or at least the reasons they claim for holding the views they hold), stipulate to it, then call it into question."
I no longer subscribe to legacy media. I don't go to X, or Facebook any more. When it comes to FOX I do watch their free movie channel Tubi, which has interesting foreign films.
Haven't watched or listened to 60 minutes in 3 or 4 years. Do I have to listen in now to be an educated consumer? Or can I just skip it. There's not much time in a day for garbage.
I appreciate the thought you put into this. I would reiterate that we have plenty of examples of what happens when conservatives use their worldview as the yardstick for what passes as "objective" journalism. I saw it first-hand at one of the pioneers of this style of "journalism," The Washington Times, where I was a political reporter in the 1980s. I left the paper because I could no longer stomach being associated with news filtered through an agenda of advancing a right-wing worldview and set of politics.
Today we have outlets like the Sinclair chain of television stations and the indirectly connected Baltimore Sun, owned by Sinclair CEO David Smith. New York magazine has an excellent article on how The Sun and Sinclair's Baltimore and D.C. outlets are being weaponized against Maryland Gov. Wes Moore. A legitimate news story about discrepancies between what Moore has said about his military record and the actual details of his service is being blown out of porportion in a way that appears designed to "Swift-boat" any 2028 presidential aspirations Moore might have. This is way more ham-handed than most of what the Bari Weiss crew at CBS might do at 60 Minutes (or is it?), but it is very much the logical extension of the presumption that journalists holding up a mirror to a complex world and revealing what's lurking in the world's dark corners is somehow "liberal bias" and "not reporting the news" because the result might leave people less persuaded that conservative opinions and the people who hold them are correct.
I am not fooled by Bari Weiss and the Ellisons propagandist overhaul of CBS, and I bet most Stephen Colbert lovers aren't either. Right wing state regime media has infiltrated all legacy networks, and any freedom loving American knowing this has shut it off. For 50 years I watched CBS evening news, 60 minutes, Sunday Morning, sitcoms and late night. But I don't anymore. So I cancelled my Direct TV and threw out the cable box. I don't need fascist lies invading my living room. Nice piece of writing, by the way.
"Chunkier Reese Witherspoon."
What a dick.
“Readers lose when journalists take it upon themselves (and call upon others) to imagine it out of existence for the sake of “persuasion.””
This is the truth and a it’s a massive problem thanks to the rights takeover of everything. ‘Persuasion’ should never even be considered if you’re an actual journalist. Anything that’s beyond reporting straight facts is opinion (or propaganda or influencing) and should be clearly labeled as so.
Including conservative philosophies might be defensible if there were such things. Currently there is just a hodgepodge of positions designed to favor people of means and to hell with everybody else, e.g. socialism/bailouts for the corporations, bootstraps for the poor and middle class.
Except the poor don’t even have boots.
I suspect 60 Minutes will devolve into a very bad version of Firing Line (which, in fact, is a pretty decent show on its own terms which the host makes no effort to disguise).
Excellent Brian, "The influencer’s objective, as he describes it, is this: Try to persuade people with opposing views that they are wrong, or that they have blindspots, by first flattering their collective sense of righteousness, then chipping away at it. Understand why they believe what they believe (or at least the reasons they claim for holding the views they hold), stipulate to it, then call it into question."
I no longer subscribe to legacy media. I don't go to X, or Facebook any more. When it comes to FOX I do watch their free movie channel Tubi, which has interesting foreign films.
Haven't watched or listened to 60 minutes in 3 or 4 years. Do I have to listen in now to be an educated consumer? Or can I just skip it. There's not much time in a day for garbage.
Serious question: does anyone under 50 watch legacy media?