"A great American city is on the precipice of being run by a communist who has publicly embraced a terroristic ideology,”
I’d love for reporters to start pushing politicians when they say dumb shit. Don’t just let them say it and then gawk at the camera like you’re Jim from the office or move on with questions.
“in what way are you concluding that Mr. Mamdani is a communist? Are you aware of the difference between communism and socialism, and could you explain how he is a communist?”
“what terrorist ideology? waits for answer In what way is this the ideology of a terrorist?”
Show that they have no idea what the words they spew mean. Show that they’re just using buzzwords that sound scary.
Too often they treat what these people say as if it the news itself. Unbiased, and a source of truth. Reporting has just become gossip repeating the worse people say.
This really is a big problem, “look at what this person said” type stories are basically how Donald Trump Rose to power, his words quoted as if they were the news itself, without any sort of filtering to fact checking. If he had simply been reported as lying without repeating the LIE his power would be significantly reduced
but how do you do that when the maga base all believe there is a big kabal against them. If the reporters just say the politician lied the base will claim the reporter lied.
either they need to call out the politician on the first lie and not let it go further until they respond with the explaination or you give them absolutely no air time, not even stating they lied. make them responsible or invisible.
It’s a consequence of access journalism. And the false notion that neutrality is possible. The grain of wood is biased. The proteins that make up our body and its biological functions fold in a biased way. The fundamental particles and fields of the universe have biases too.
There is nothing wrong with bias as long as it is biased in favor of the truth. Performative neutrality, presenting two positions weakly/lazily as equally plausible. It has no value. If we lived in a society where individuals not only had the time, but desire to independently research everything for themselves as well. This wouldn’t be such a problem. But we don’t.
People read reporting and articles to be informed. When the reporting doesn’t present anything definitive other than party A said one thing and party B said another thing. Then the reader simply chooses the one they prefer. Regardless of the facts.
i don’t really ever watch news anymore, but when I did I would scream at the television, “ASK A FUCKING FOLLOW-UP QUESTION”
I don’t know what is being taught as journalism anymore but it seems to be just take the statement, get the sound bite, and think up a clickbaitable title.
“wow, this politician is saying batshit crazy things. This will earn me a lot of clicks. Gotta release the article before the other news sites do. I’ll use AI to write it up.”
It’s telling enough when you see fox segments that were supposedly made to demonize him and it’s things like “free child care for all, fare taxes for all, fare wages based on labor”.
I think they’re so up their asses that they completely forgot how regular people even think. Many of their attacks were basically advertising for his campaign lol.
The problem is that even facts are even subjective for these people. It’s always been that way.
I remember that after 9/11 I had a coworker who was convinced the problem was with Islam itself. “I’ve read their book”, he would explain to everyone who was within earshot, “They want to kill all the infidels. Their religion is incompatible with our country”. He held that as a fact, just as sure as the fact that the sun sets in the west, and that God gave him the right to bear arms.
To many people in this country, Muslim = Terrorist, no further questions asked. You can’t argue with that. Not because they are right, but you literally can’t argue with someone who thinks God gave them those incorrect facts.
idk…all those questions give them too much information about the potential disanswer. I think they should just say, “do you have any evidence to support the claim you just made?”
“democrats answer questions like this every day, surely you want to prove you’re better than them?”
Get digs at their egos. At the very least, there may be one or two conservatives out there who see that and go “yeah, why IS he afraid of answering a simple question?”
Journalists are owned by billionaire’s such as Jeff Bezos. The only teeth journalism has are small independent shops as the Big Journalists of our time work for an Oligarch.
I’d love for reporters to start pushing politicians when they say dumb shit. Don’t just let them say it and then gawk at the camera like you’re Jim from the office or move on with questions.
“in what way are you concluding that Mr. Mamdani is a communist? Are you aware of the difference between communism and socialism, and could you explain how he is a communist?”
“what terrorist ideology? waits for answer In what way is this the ideology of a terrorist?”
Show that they have no idea what the words they spew mean. Show that they’re just using buzzwords that sound scary.
And then give the facts.
Too often they treat what these people say as if it the news itself. Unbiased, and a source of truth. Reporting has just become gossip repeating the worse people say.
This really is a big problem, “look at what this person said” type stories are basically how Donald Trump Rose to power, his words quoted as if they were the news itself, without any sort of filtering to fact checking. If he had simply been reported as lying without repeating the LIE his power would be significantly reduced
but how do you do that when the maga base all believe there is a big kabal against them. If the reporters just say the politician lied the base will claim the reporter lied.
either they need to call out the politician on the first lie and not let it go further until they respond with the explaination or you give them absolutely no air time, not even stating they lied. make them responsible or invisible.
You hit the nail on the head. It’s insanely frustrating.
It’s beyond frustrating, they are complicit in the evil that’s taking place
It’s a consequence of access journalism. And the false notion that neutrality is possible. The grain of wood is biased. The proteins that make up our body and its biological functions fold in a biased way. The fundamental particles and fields of the universe have biases too.
There is nothing wrong with bias as long as it is biased in favor of the truth. Performative neutrality, presenting two positions weakly/lazily as equally plausible. It has no value. If we lived in a society where individuals not only had the time, but desire to independently research everything for themselves as well. This wouldn’t be such a problem. But we don’t.
People read reporting and articles to be informed. When the reporting doesn’t present anything definitive other than party A said one thing and party B said another thing. Then the reader simply chooses the one they prefer. Regardless of the facts.
Totally agree. Way too many stories are about the quote itself.
Person says subjective or demonstrably true or untrue objective thing
vs
Demonstrably true objective thing (with person substantiating)
if only…
i don’t really ever watch news anymore, but when I did I would scream at the television, “ASK A FUCKING FOLLOW-UP QUESTION”
I don’t know what is being taught as journalism anymore but it seems to be just take the statement, get the sound bite, and think up a clickbaitable title.
“wow, this politician is saying batshit crazy things. This will earn me a lot of clicks. Gotta release the article before the other news sites do. I’ll use AI to write it up.”
It’s telling enough when you see fox segments that were supposedly made to demonize him and it’s things like “free child care for all, fare taxes for all, fare wages based on labor”.
I think they’re so up their asses that they completely forgot how regular people even think. Many of their attacks were basically advertising for his campaign lol.
Read the article. The republicans have answers for most of these questions.
The problem is that even facts are even subjective for these people. It’s always been that way.
I remember that after 9/11 I had a coworker who was convinced the problem was with Islam itself. “I’ve read their book”, he would explain to everyone who was within earshot, “They want to kill all the infidels. Their religion is incompatible with our country”. He held that as a fact, just as sure as the fact that the sun sets in the west, and that God gave him the right to bear arms.
To many people in this country, Muslim = Terrorist, no further questions asked. You can’t argue with that. Not because they are right, but you literally can’t argue with someone who thinks God gave them those incorrect facts.
US “journalists” are almost universally paid shills from one of 3 companies, who are directed to never challenge their interviewee.
The reason is because they’re threatened with never getting the earliest scoop, and thus the most clicks, if their interviewee feels challenged.
The White House & Pentagon set this standard perhaps most sternly after 9/11, and its only ever gotten worse.
idk…all those questions give them too much information about the potential disanswer. I think they should just say, “do you have any evidence to support the claim you just made?”
“No more questions and you’re also a communist terrorist anarchist antifa.”
They won’t answer. They don’t have to.
“Why are you so afraid of answering questions?”
“democrats answer questions like this every day, surely you want to prove you’re better than them?”
Get digs at their egos. At the very least, there may be one or two conservatives out there who see that and go “yeah, why IS he afraid of answering a simple question?”
If they had a scintilla of shame your strategy might work
Journalists are owned by billionaire’s such as Jeff Bezos. The only teeth journalism has are small independent shops as the Big Journalists of our time work for an Oligarch.