773

Will Bunch expresses what I've been thinking since Trump was elected. American democracy is under attack from within. The fascists who yearn for an authoritarian government in the media are promoting it, and the media who supposedly don't support it fail to recognize it. They are busy trying to follow the political playbook of the 20th century.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 178 points 1 year ago

Spare me the outrage from the press, when the press is the entity that helped create this mess.

All this could have been avoided some 6 years ago if these clowns in the press did their goddamn jobs. Trump had a history of corruption going back decades. Between sexual assault cases, crooked business dealings,connections to the Russians as well as connections to the mafia, and everything in between. Rarely any of that came to light or was taken as seriously as it should have been. It was one free pass after another. They gave him endless air time because they loved those sweet, sweet ad-dollars. They considered him a joke candidate and never dove deep into his past finances or connections.

...And then it happened. He was actually elected. And that's when it became serious.

Fuck every last one of these journalists who just sat back, let him slide, and just let it happened. Now they have the gall to talk about authoritarian-this, and fascism-that.

[-] wahming 114 points 1 year ago

The press isn't monolithic. This is one journalist stating their opinion and analysis of what the rest of the industry needs to focus on.

[-] HeartyBeast@kbin.social 53 points 1 year ago

Came here to say this. There is some excellent, probing journalism out there. The problem is, it's not very profitable

[-] downpunxx@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago

and in there lies the rub, everybody's gotta fill their own ricebowl

[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

It is far more monolithic than people realize. Folks think that only the Fox News if the world were being overly generous to Trump when he was just a candidate. The reality is that all mass market news outlets were.

I was a loooong time listener of NPR, a news outlets that most would probably consider as neutral or even left of center as you'll get from US mass media. And I totally lost respect for them hearing them cover Trump as a candidate. Even now, I can just about hear Steve Inskeep chuckling after a Trump speech and simply never taking him as a serious candidate. This was someone who was running for the highest office in the land. He would have access to our nuclear codes. And these fucken reporters, who I had previously held in high regard, were just laughing at some of the insane antics that Donald was pulling. They were letting this shit slide while they would have roasted any other candidate if they had said the same thing.

And it's not just NPR but any mass media news outlets acted the same way. That's where the majority of Americans get their news and they were all doing the same things.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Yep. They did next to nothing to really vet him in any way. And so many had a vendetta against the Clintons that they just could not help but try to get their digs in on Hillary and Bill as much as possible, too.

[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Yup. Republicans had been building a case against Hillary for some 2 decades. So much so, in fact, that even seasoned Democrats were falling for those attacks against her were ingrained into our pop culture.

Such a shame because she would have made a perfect president. She was a pitbull that was willing to call Republicans on their shit.

[-] astraeus@programming.dev 12 points 1 year ago

The same seasoned Democrats that stacked the primaries in her favor? The 2016 election was the first time I had a real voice in an election and it felt like it was just vacuumed away. The candidate who seemed the most appropriate and the most qualified got swept under the rug in favor of the shit-throwers. She wasn’t perfect, she was a better terrible than Trump.

In 2020 the Democrats scrambled for a viable candidate and somehow Joe Biden was the best they could give us, and it was an absolute gamble. His victory in the 2020 election was dangerously overstated and the danger of a repeat of 2016 in 2024 was ignored.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I was convinced she'd be a neoliberal and would make grand bargains with the GOP like Bill did. Those grand bargains included "welfare reforms" like kicking grandmas out of public housing when their grandkids would deal drugs in their project (like grandmas have the power to control their grown-ass grandchildren). The impacts of Clinton's actions reached FAR beyond his presidency - I was fighting such evictions at Legal Aid during the second term of Bush Jr., evictions that were the result of Clinton's bargain with the devil.

Though you're right, most of the right's anti-Bill Clinton bumper stickers during his 2 terms were actually shots at Hillary Clinton.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Daisyifyoudo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Fuck every last one of these journalists who just sat back

"journalists". That's awful generous of you

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Stenographers?

I remember Colbert's session at the WH Correspondents Dinner and how the "liberal media" kept saying no one found it funny, it bombed, etc...not realizing that it was indeed funny to those not in the room. But making the "liberal media" the butt of the joke in some hard and hilarious truth-telling was more than they could bear, apparently, even if Colbert is part of the same media empire...

As excited as I am to be here with the president, I am appalled to be surrounded by the liberal media that is destroying America, with the exception of Fox News. Fox News gives you both sides of every story: the president's side, and the vice president's side.

But the rest of you, what are you thinking, reporting on NSA wiretapping or secret prisons in eastern Europe? Those things are secret for a very important reason: they're super-depressing. And if that's your goal, well, misery accomplished.

Over the last five years you people were so good -- over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out. Those were good times, as far as we knew.

But, listen, let's review the rules. Here's how it works: the president makes decisions. He's the Decider. The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know - fiction!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[-] matchphoenix@feddit.uk 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We need to hear from more experts on authoritarian movements and fewer pollsters and political strategists. We need journalists who’ll talk a lot less about who’s up or down and a lot more about the stakes — including Trump’s plans to dismantle the democratic norms that he calls “the administrative state,” to weaponize the criminal justice system, and to surrender the war against climate change — if the 45th president becomes the 47th. We need the media to see 2024 not as a traditional election, but as an effort to mobilize a mass movement that would undo democracy and splatter America with more blood like what was shed Saturday in Jacksonville. We need to understand that if the next 15 months remain the worst-covered election in U.S. history, it might also be the last.

Incredibly captivating article, but when you reach this final paragraph, you know with absolute and agonizing certainty that none of this will come to fruition. The mainstream media isn’t going to fix itself and this election will be covered, same as all the rest, as a horserace.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 20 points 1 year ago

The mainstream media are corporations first and press/media second. They will only do the things that make them more money and 99.9% of the time that's in direct opposition of what is good for any given situation.

I 110% do not expect the behavior to change. It's money we're discussing and shitty gossip trash talking/ political sports casting is what makes media money so it's what they'll keep doing. :(

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 54 points 1 year ago

The issue is there is a belief that the problems we are facing are because we can't accept each other's opinions and we all need to buckle down and compromise with one another.

Which is deliciously naive in a world where Nazism has gone from "So universally reviled that they are a punchline at best" to "Just an opinion from a guy asking questions."

Do not serve Bar Nazis

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

I think there is a large amount of this that's the result of social media. When I was a kid, there were still flat-earthers and other people who believe extremely stupid things. The thing was, however, that if you said that out loud, all of the people around you would with varying degrees of politeness tell you you're a fucking idiot and you'd usually change your mind quickly. In today's environment, not only can you go online and not get called a fucking idiot for your dumb opinions, you can find all of the other fucking idiots and form a ~~circle-jerk~~ Facebook group for bad opinions and feel validated in believing them. Oh, and even if you don't go looking for your own little community of morons, Facebook and the rest will happily help surface those morons for you.

The reality of social media is that not only do they serve bar nazis, they might as well be tinder for bar nazis.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (40 replies)
[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 45 points 1 year ago

To me this is an interesting bit:

but brutal fascism or flawed democracy.

The US under Trump wasn't North Korean style fascism, although it may have been headed in that direction. It was maybe fascism with strong overtones of democracy. People still got to vote, and their vote mattered, it's just that Dear Leader had his thumb on the scale. Congress members and senators still showed up to work, and the decisions they took still mattered, even if some of the Republicans were constantly violating precedents and norms. The judicial system still kept churning and mostly following the laws and precedents, even if Trump appointed a lot of unqualified partisan judges.

My guess is that many Trump voters wanted this kind of system. They didn't want a full-on North Korea sort of situation, and they were deluded enough that they thought they could keep a Trump presidency from becoming a full-on dictatorship. What they wanted was basically a "flawed democracy" where people who looked like them still got to vote and their vote mattered, but they definitely wanted their vote to matter much more than the votes of other people.

At the same time, the alternative was definitely also a flawed democracy. To get elected requires raising a ton of money, which ties strings to almost everyone who runs. The DNC largely picks who's allowed to run as a democrat, and one of the main qualifications to run is a person's ability to raise money. As a result, even when the democrats are in charge, common sense things that are supported by a majority of the population don't pass when they're opposed by any special interest with money.

It's easy to understand why there was initially so much overlap between supporters of Bernie Sanders and supporters of Trump. People were tired of the oligarchy-controlled pseudo-democracy, and they wanted radical changes.

The advertising duopoly of Facebook and Google has weakened journalism at a time when we desperately needed good journalism. What's left is basic horse-race and scandal-focused coverage for politics, and click bait for the rest. There are still some journalists out there doing good work, like the folks at Pro Publica. But, that kind of journalism is difficult and expensive.

I'm scared that the window for journalism being able to rescue the US might have passed. If Trump wins again, you know that the freedom of the press is going to take a serious hit. On the other hand, if the democrats win big they're going to be completely tied to the people who fund their campaigns. And the corporate-owned media isn't going to be doing stories on how the corporate-owned politicians are handing even more power to corporations.

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

People still got to vote, and their vote mattered, it’s just that Dear Leader had his thumb on the scale.

This is only because an insurrection and attempted coup failed.

The advertising duopoly of Facebook and Google has weakened journalism at a time when we desperately needed good journalism.

Though they didn't help, honestly the faux both-sides "journalism" is taking its own L's, mostly. I canceled my sub to the Times quite a while back because of this type of thing, and I find it rare to see actual journalism quite a lot of the time. Headlines like "deadlock in congress due to continued failure to reach consensus on tax bill." Actual reality: Republicans want to cut taxes for the wealthy and provide loopholes for yacht owners with no plan to pay for it, Democrats want to spend approx 0.00000001% of the military budget to provide free meals for elementary students.

See also, any trans issues. "Controversy roils over trans athletes in sports." Reality: one fucking asshole in Iowa or Idaho or Mississippi or wherever want to blanket ban on trans athletes in sport because one MTF wants to play a sport. Oh, and they don't even have a kid that goes to the school/participates in the sport and the MTF player hasn't broken the top 10.

Or climate or Trump or anything with the slightest bit of controversy. Butchering the quote, but it's something along the lines of "as a journalist, if someone tells you it's raining, and another person tell's you it's not, it's not your job to report disagreement, it's your job to stick your head out the window and see if it's raining."

Applied to that first quote, if journalism was doing its job, every outlet would be reporting in no uncertain terms that the former president tried to deny your right to vote and overthrow democracy.

[-] yata@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

People still got to vote, and their vote mattered

Both questionable statements, considering massive systematic voter suppression that has been going on for decades, and also on account of the US political system, not least first-past-the-post and the electoral college, your vote may easily end up not mattering at all (as compared to countries with proportional representation).

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Sure. But it's not like they announce the election results before the election. Not everyone's votes count, and there's a lot of bullshit, but the results are still fundamentally influenced by the voting. That's "flawed democracy" vs. "pretend democracy".

The difference is that occasionally you can get upsets like the Roy Moore vs. Doug Jones election. Even with all the knobs and levers twisted to give Moore every advantage possible, the allegations that Moore had been having sex with numerous underage girls was enough to derail his run. In a properly functioning system it shouldn't have even been close. But, in the end, it was very close.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago

even if some of the Republicans were constantly violating precedents and norms

I think the last decade or so of GOP actions are a clear example of why any norm or precedent that's actually vital to how things run needs to be codified into an actual rule or law with a clear punishment for violations.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago

Bring back fairness doctrine and break up large media

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago

Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast media, so it would need to be be expanded to include Cable/Satellite TV as well as somehow the Internet/streaming.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is, and will always be- capitalism. When everything is for profit, lies become commodities. This system can work, until there is a crisis that markets can’t absorb. Climate change cannot be commodified because it affects consumers. Fascism is capital’s answer to the crisis. It can’t be voted away. We must demand for a planned economy to transform into a sustainable society. It’s our only hope. This is where we need to be.

[-] DharkStare@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I read an article not too long ago about a guy who started a worker owned restaurant. Everyone got a really good salary and any profits would be split evenly between all the workers. The article reveals that the business hasn't actually turned a profit but it didn't matter to the employees because the business made enough to cover it's expenses and all the workers were paid really well (IIRC they were making something like $30 an hour).

The concept really blew my mind: a business didn't need to be profitable to be successful.

Capitalism really does seem to be the problem.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Now imagine every business was ran this way. No overproduction. No expanding markets. Only producing what is needed. But there’s the rub. Who decides what is needed? Our whole cultural paradigm must change for this to be possible, and we don’t have generations to work out the kinks. It truly is the tragedy of the commons.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Journalists today have no association with the scum of the Earth types radicalized by authoritarian movements. They are college educated and understand complex principles, but radicalized people are the opposite, which is simple and based on assumptions. It's built on racism, xenophobia, and hate towards anyone different from them that they can blame. The entire point is about power and ensuring that conservatives hold that power.

Now many young people think there is an oligarchy in the United States, which there isn't, yet. This conservative authoritarian movement intends to establish it. Currently power still resides in the voters. The wealthy keep circumventing the means of messaging but fail time after time. That is why Elon really bought Twitter and intends to destroy it, because it prevented the message the wealthy wanted the public to believe. It's why the Fediverse is so important, because the wealthy can't stop the flow of information.

[-] Coreidan@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

That’s because “journalism” is a joke and died a long time ago.

[-] kool_newt@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

IMHO, freedom of the press is a right that should apply only to people, not companies, organizations, institutions. No organization should be able to call itself news or press while seeking profit. Freedom to profit from acting as press is not/should not be a right.

Then shut down Fox News, CNN, and friends as dangerous shows peddling lies.

The pursuit of profit is simply not compatible with the pursuit of truth.

Individuals motivated to be legit press can work independently, form co-ops to share resources, or seek funding limted by law.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 year ago

This seemingly (though not really) simple truth is really propaganda. CNN isn't unbiased, but then, no one is. Fox News is blatantly lying. Mentioning both sides is a way of whitewashing the truth about the worse actor. Tying the complaint to corporate profits is a way of disguising the real message.

No one should take news reporting at face value. Everyone should be educated in media literacy. But there's a big difference between a motivated agenda and outright disinformation.

A side-observation that I think is truly only coincidence: user name is Kool_Newt. Newt Gingrich is one of the people I blame most for setting us on this cursed path of culture war and lunacy. It definitely existed long before him (Caning of Charles Sumner), but he lit that fuse on fire and fanned the flames.

https://uh.edu/~englin/rephandout.html

https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/gingrich-language-set-new-course/O5bgK6lY2wQ3KwEZsYTBlO/

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 year ago

That's becuase journalism cant affird to give it to you straight because they can't piss you off, since they need to sell articles.

I'll tell you EXACTLY what the hell the problem is, but you aren't going to like it at all, I promise.

The problem is everyone (yes you and me included) is way too entitled and desperate to be either noticed or get ahead. Some of this is economy, some is the internet making the globe feel small, some is politics, mostly though it's our incessant greed combined with the ease of life in modern times.

When people are unhappy the government reflects that.

[-] Hanabie@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

News need to be reduced to just news, without the presenters' opinions on it. It's this "processed information" dilemma, fuelled by greed and enabled by lacklustre regulations, that's enabling the chaos. Not just (but especially) in the USA.

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is no such thing as news that does not have analysis and editorial processing in it. The more someone tries to pretend there is no implicit bias in their reporting on facts the more nervous you should be.

Being upfront about your biases, writing persuasively, and admitting/addressing counterfactuals and limitations is the honest way to report the news.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
773 points (97.3% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2409 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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