this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
245 points (95.5% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3523 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I just get kind of triggered whenever any media in today's fractured media landscape uses "Main Stream Media" especially in a headline as loaded as this.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I think people forget that Alex Jones was one of the original people pushing the phrase "mainstream media" back in the Bush years...

...back then nobody thought anything of it because we had evidence that the NYT was sitting on damaging stories for the Bush admin (like the warrantless NSA spying) for years to protect them.

But the attitude and name for it was a bad way to present it then, and it's a bad way to present it now, because it amounts to: You know that those big media companies that are mostly trustworthy lie to you sometimes or speak on issues in a way that aren't entirely truthful, but you know what's better these no-name media groups that are funded by foreign governments that are definitely lying to you!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Another great example was CNN and their relationship with weapons manufacturers in the 90s.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

CNN has a weird history, because there's been a lot of conspiracies that have been debunked from that period, too.

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22170/did-cnn-fake-footage-during-the-gulf-war-purporting-a-live-gas-attack

They were accused of faking a live shot during the Gulf War because of a weird background that seems like it actually is an exterior shot of a building there. I specifically remember Alex Jones claiming 20 years ago it was proof CNN was liars. A lot more evidence that he was the liar.

But, unlike me (and those in that thread), a lot of people never were willing to keep looking and find more evidence one way or the other and not take the rantings of someone like Alex Jones as gospel.

(If it isn't clear, in the early 2000's I had a coworker/neighbor who was leftist who was into Jones because Jones was against Bush at the time, which he erroneously thought that meant that Jones must be right about something because Bush was so duplicitous. I think he was also smart enough to move on from that, thankfully, of course. Too many aren't.)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I know this response is way too late, but I remembered the term that mattered. CNN effect. If you look it up you'll see a lot of old articles about what a 24-hour News Network did to basically change the way people absorbed information and how that changed perceptions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Never too late to share information. Thanks, I hadn't heard of the term!