USA Politics (redux)

[71 dB]

Yes that is mostly because people refuse to support serious journalism by buying subscriptions to newspapers.  Especially local newspaper where most of the news is generated and then re-reported in the big national papers.  And you know how much subscriptions cost?  Usually only $5-10 a month.  And when you turn to YT instead of paying a happy meal price once a month another greedy hedge fund like Alden Global Capital buys up and tears up another newspaper.  And when you watch YT you are getting extreme simplification, cherry picking, biased and highly opinionated "reporting."  Just think about it.

The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

People don't need to know every small thing that happens in the nation. People in Florida don't need to know if a bank has been robbed in Nevada.
The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.

[MusicTurner]

(...)
The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.

Journalism has always had those problems, including sensationalism of the entertaining/irrelevant sort  - it's described in depth say in French novels back in mid-19th century. Still, good journalistic principles of criticism and factual reporting have also existed. But it's not necessarily served on a platter, as an appetizing, sensationalist snack. There's increased attention nowadays towards constructive journalism too, opening for and focusing on solutions in news stories problems, after hearing several sides of a conflict for example, but it's probably likely to remain a niche overall.

[71 dB]

Mitch McConnell says the Republicans are going to do all of their agenda when they are in power if the Dems end the Filibuster. Well, that's actually what is supposed to happen in democracy: If you win you get to do your agenda! However, both the Dems and the Reps don't really want to do their whole agenda, but only the parts approved by the Chamber of Commerce. Trump didn't get the Wall built and Biden won't get $15 living wage passed, because the Chamber of Commerce doesn't want those happen. Filibuster was created to give excuses to not get legislation regular people want passed.

[Herman]

The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

People don't need to know every small thing that happens in the nation. People in Florida don't need to know if a bank has been robbed in Nevada.

newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.
Youtube is much more time consuming.

The real problem is agenda-based narratives, the way news are told. Often journalists have to write stories in ways they don't agree with just to keep their job. If you have to feed your family you perhaps forced to do things you wouldn't do otherwise so you lie to people.

youtube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.

[DavidW]

Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

lol those are free.

It is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

To be a Youtuber you need to have
(a) a camera
(b) a microphone
(c) a clear agenda or bias to build your subscriber base
(d) undisclosed sponsors

Think about it.  Oh and that doesn't even get into the YouTube algorithm subtly changing your behavior as it recommends similar videos to what you watch (but perhaps even more fringe).  No matter how intelligent you are, if you can't admit that you're just an animal prone to psychological tricks and manipulation that have proven to work against all people then you will be manipulated.  You just won't even know it.

[Karl Henning]

"Trump seemed to channel this body of thought when he seized upon a moral panic about a few transparently silly stories—"fake news"—and created a catchphrase to smear serious journalists. While we in the media wrung our hands at the idea that people might believe the Pope had endorsed Trump, Trump himself realized that the real danger—and for him, the real opportunity—was different. It was not that people would believe such nonsense, but that they could be persuaded to disbelieve authoritative, carefully sourced journalism."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/03/the-conspiracy-theorists-problem-isnt-what-they-believe/618285/

Exactly.  And here we have intellectuals priding themselves upon their sneering at proper journalism.
Trump sez "fake news" Another sez "corporate media" two sides of the same wooden nickel.

[Herman]

lol those are free.

It is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

At papers like the NY Times and the Wa Post the peer control is massive. There are hundreds of reporters reading each other's stuff and they will let it know if the reporting doesn't stack up.

[Karl Henning]

newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.
Youtube is much more time consuming.
youtube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.

"Youtube is much more time consuming," and thus, too, more addictive for their confirmation-bias marks.

[71 dB]

newspapers don't spend a lot of space on bank robberies. Also, you don't have to read every word that's in a paper. You learn how to read a paper and what to skip.

Yeah, 20 years ago I learned to skip so much eventually I read almost nothing. So I ended my subscription.

Youtube is much more time consuming.

Yes, when you watch the cat videos Youtube recommends. 

Youtube and podcasts are generally much more agenda driven than papers like the Times or the Post, because those channels cater to niche groups.

At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all, because they get add money from insurance companies and Big Pharma. In general Youtubers don't get that kind of money so they can be pro-medicare for all. Do your research. What does science and studies say about things and how well does MSM compare to Youtubers in regards of those facts? If MSM is correct, I guess all other western countries are idiots fot not having something that only the US has, costs 2 times more and doesn't covers everyone. Are we Finns stupid for not having medical bankruptcies? Because according to the Times we are.

[Karl Henning]

At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all

This statement gauges your critical faculties to a nicety.

[71 dB]

lol those are free.

I mean you can pay for subscription and have additional member only content etc.

It is one thing to acknowledge that there are biases baked into journalism but subtle and perhaps even subconscious (NYTimes, Wall Street Journal) and extreme agenda-based reporting (MSNBC, Fox News) and another thing to accuse them of all being liars.  That is just stupidly paranoid and really straight from the Trump playbook. 

I completely agree with Herman's post and I'll add this.

To be a journalist for a major newspaper you usually need to have
(a) journalism degree or something similar
(b) previous experience
(c) sources for your reporting
(d) an editor and fact checker

To be a Youtuber you need to have
(a) a camera
(b) a microphone
(c) a clear agenda or bias to build your subscriber base
(d) undisclosed sponsors

Think about it.  Oh and that doesn't even get into the YouTube algorithm subtly changing your behavior as it recommends similar videos to what you watch (but perhaps even more fringe).  No matter how intelligent you are, if you can't admit that you're just an animal prone to psychological tricks and manipulation that have proven to work against all people then you will be manipulated.  You just won't even know it.

You trust "authorities". I don't. I don't care WHO says something. I care about what is said. People without education might have excellent insight about some things such as what does it mean to live without education. When there are adds, there is money and money obscures things. It happens with "real" journalists and it happens with Youtubers. Where the money is from dictates how it obscures things. Some getting money from military industry complex WILL WRITE PRO-WAR ARTICLES!!! If you don't, you stop getting money!

There are many kind of Youtubers form Alex Jones to Rational National. I use my head to figure out who is full of bs and who isn't. You should do the same instead of just trusting "authorities" because they have HARVARD education.

[71 dB]

Prime time cable news shows not doing well.

[71 dB]

This statement gauges your critical faculties to a nicety.

Your endless "one-liners" reflect your feelings rather than any meaningful substance. I never know what you think about the issues I am talking about. I only know you think I am an idiot and you don't agree with me. Well, okay Karl, but if all I got from you is you think I am an idiot then I am not interested arguing with you. Sorry.

[Karl Henning]

Your endless "one-liners" reflect your feelings rather than any meaningful substance. I never know what you think about the issues I am talking about. I only know you think I am an idiot and you don't agree with me. Well, okay Karl, but if all I got from you is you think I am an idiot then I am not interested arguing with you. Sorry.

No, Poju, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you're blind both to your own biases, and to the intellectually unreliable agitprop of some of your preferred YouTube sources.
To have little confidence in your critical faculties is a far cry from thinking you an idiot.

And, when one sentence serves the purpose, I feel no obligation to stretch to a second.

[Karl Henning]

The MSM supposedly being opposed as a monolith to Medicare for all, is a self-serving fantasy.
And you can examine and reevaluate that fantasy, and how, why and whence you imbibed that fantasy, or not. To quote Wanda Dershowitz (Jamie Lee Curtis): What would Plato do?

[greg]

The World has changed. Nowadays people pay for other kind of subscriptions such a Youtube channel memberships.

There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...

[71 dB]

No, Poju, I don't think you're an idiot. I think you're blind both to your own biases, and to the intellectually unreliable agitprop of some of your preferred YouTube sources.
To have little confidence in your critical faculties is a far cry from thinking you an idiot.

And, when one sentence serves the purpose, I feel no obligation to stretch to a second.

Everyone has got a bias. You are lying if you say you don't have one yourself. My bias is green/left. I say it openly so people know where I'm coming from. I can argue for my positions and I am ready to admit when I am wrong. Most of my political opinions are NOT from Youtubers. I had them LONG BEFORE Youtube existed. I started forming political opinions back when I was a teenager, in the 80's. What I have learned from Youtubers and  from following US politics more closely is what kind of country the US is, but Youtubers haven't really changed my political views in general, but they have changed completely my views about the US. When Covid-19 hit the World a year ago, I knew the US will be hit really hard (oligarchy + for profit healthcare + incompetent leadership) and it happened. Last summer I argued half of Covid-19 related deaths in the US could have been avoided with competent leadership. Now, experts estimate 40 % of deaths could have been avoided. I was pretty close. I was sceptical about Biden supporting $15 living wage beyond campaign talk. Well, how hard did he fight for it? Biden also campaigned for public option, didn't he? Strange, because he hasn't talked about it after the election! He dropped it instantly! Instead the new relief package funnels billions to COBRA (straight into the pockets of insurance companies) just like the oligarchs want. The evidence supports my views and biases and when it stops supporting I know something is wrong with my information sources.

It doesn't matter what politicians say. How they vote and fight is what counts. That's why corrupt politicians don't want progressive politices voted for even when they know they have the votes to block them. It exposes them as bullshitters and voters know to vote them out.

I'm sorry if you don't have confidence in my critical faculties. It makes my confidence in my ability to express myself clearly drop. I do not "just believe" everything Cenk Uygur says. I think about it to check if it makes sense or not. Most of the time it does. Sometime it doesn't ("Dutch people live in Denmark."  )

[SimonNZ]

At least certain agendas have a platform. For example, MSM media is against medicare for all, because they get add money from insurance companies and Big Pharma.

Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.

You trust "authorities". I don't. I don't care WHO says something. I care about what is said.

Confirmation bias.

I do not "just believe" everything Cenk Uygur says. I think about it to check if it makes sense or not.

Confirmation bias.

I am out of this thread. Why did I even bother...

Please.

There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...

"Mainstream" tv reporters use those crowd-sourced videos in their reportage...and then provide the various forms of context that "citizen journalist" couldn't or wouldn't.

[71 dB]

Once again: you have no idea what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all, you simply accept your Youtubers saying that a large diverse group of professional journalists should be  sweepingly dismissed... so you'll stick with them.

I think I have a general idea of what "the mainstream media" says about medicare for all because I watch Youtubers comment what "the mainstream media" says.

Confirmation bias.

Applies to everyone, not only me.

[71 dB]

There are also some stories that are filmed, which can be watched fully on youtube or twitter, for free.

The journalists can provide some context, but there's nothing quite like going to the source to see the full video. Better to see things for yourself than just follow what a journalist tells you/wants you to believe.

So that is another advantage of youtube/twitter that I don't think was mentioned...

John Farina's footage for Status Coup of the insurrection was epic and used (licenced) widely.