It certainly did not help that during the four Biden years, every single day there were far more pictures and articles of the orange felon than of our sitting president in the MSM!
It is one reason why I no longer read ANY MSM (other than the Guardian, which is funded by readers and donors - and I donate monthly) after canceling my subscription to The Washington Post in October 2024. I simply do not trust any of them any longer.
Well put! Imagine if there was a major news outlet you could turn to and know that you would only get truth, which (as I say on They Stand Corrected) = facts + context.
That’s exactly what this platform is. The status quo is no longer needed. I don’t need to hear pundits pontificating on loop telling me about what I can see with my own eyes in real time. They made themselves obsolete.
Agree. The mainstream media was enraptured with Trump and downplayed his wacko statements and rallies but kept on Biden as too old. And Harris too progressive. And look what we have now. An economy which was good under Biden BEING TRASHED by Trump. Great job, corporate media. Gonna get your tax breaks now? As your businesses tank?
That's part of it, yes. They also fall for the outrage cycle. Reporting on insane things he says and does ultimately helps him set the agenda and takes attention away from other things that could really hit home for people. The people pulling Trump's strings understand these huge vulnerabilities in the media. https://joshlevs.com/episode-25-the-medias-gullibility/
I'm a news junkie, but I have canceled every subscription except the Atlantic and I never wasted my time watching cable news. Corporate media has become every bit as bad as Faux Noise. I'll spend my money on true journalists on Substack instead.
I've seen critiques saying too liberal or too conservative were the reasons for the electrical outcome, as well as the political gravity of being underwater for popularity as an incumbent party.
I think Bernie and AOC have it right, we need real populist policies that support the people and not corporations.
Start with End Citizens United (need a constitutional amendment? Let's do it), move to public funding for elections (elected positions are not just for the well heeled), corporations aren't people, they are creatures of the state for the benefit of 'we the people' by limiting personal liability.
If the Washington Post is considered legacy media, it's losing its journalists. We all know that Jennifer Rubin left and is here. Ann Telenaes is gone, followed by Ruth Marcus, and Gene Robinson. We might do well to remind Dana Milbank and Max Boot to turn off the lights when they leave. Policies there since Jeff Bezos and William Lewis took the helm have downgraded this once fine newspaper.
That lack of an endorsement has only gotten worse. The news accounts are being filtered out and opinion writers are being censored. The 'Comments' segments of articles and opinions are often more enlightening than the content of the paper's producers.
The problem is not with the legacy national news outlets.
The loss of local news is the bedrock problem. Local newspapers, print or online, that focus a voter's attention on what the city council is doing, is much more important because the actions of the city council have immediate impact on a voter's life.
Read the LWV Washington State study that started focusing attention on how the lack of local news impacts communities and undermines democracy. This is a free pdf.
And corporate owners often guide remaining local outlets to similar journalistic failures. Meanwhile, big national agencies are the ones with the budgets to lead the fight for truth. They refuse.
This is excellent on decline of news. Remember the Newseum in DC? That was an excellent museum about the free press around the world and nationally. I think sadly it closed. I can’t imagine getting my news from social media!
Thanks. Yes, the museum you are referring to did close. Meanwhile, what we need is a trustworthy source that sets aside agendas and gives us the two ingredients of truth at all times: facts+context!
I am stunned that the author nit-picks legacy media for not fact-checking (?) and having 'liberal bias" while right-wing media blatantly issues propaganda and outright lies! Also, many readers do NOT want the truth, in contrast to the author's assertion; they want "news" that confirms their preexisting beliefs. The fundamental problem is right-wing media! An electorate that seeks out and consumes garbage will vote for garbage. (Witness our present administration.)
Actually, I call out right-wing media all the time. However, that part is discussed repeatedly in "mainstream" outlets. It is their go-to response. What they are not doing is ensuring that only report truth at all times. Lots of people have learned not to trust them either. https://joshlevs.com/episode-45-political-lens-removal/
I think it's a mistake to equate the labels people assign to themselves and others vs. the reality of their policy preferences. In addition, the right wing echochamber is particularly effective at branding their opponents, which often goes unanswered by Democrats.
I hear you. Personally I reject labels. I say: Let's conserve what's working well, progress in all the ways we need to, and move forward based on truth and justice.
I've listened to Josh's 51st recording and found it interesting. However, I think he betrays his credibility on the topic of Palestine. He gives the international and local history of the negotiation of the two states, and I have no doubt that it is accurate. But what it ignores is that the Palestinians had been living on that land for centuries, primarily as farmers and herders. The creation of a Jewish state, while done legally according to the then world powers, overlooks the fact that the influx of Jewish people put Palestinians off what had been their land. A somewhat parallel example would be if Native Americans would be given back half of Manhattan, though even that would be more credible as it's only about 4 centuries since they were hoodwinked into selling it. The Palestinians are understandably irate over having been pushed off their land. Many of them became refugees because of what was done in the 1940s.
This comment stream is for the topic I wrote about in thus piece. Any responses to other topics I fact check in my podcast should come through the two feedback systems I discuss in every episode. Not here.
I am not persuaded. Of course, the legacy media cannot have the benefit of later surveys in depth. But that is not a sign of much. I not the absence of examples of distorted legacy media coverage. I stopped subscribing, not because of its coverage of the news, but because of its lousy editorial pages--too trendy by half.
News agencies had every reason to know that exit polls are not trustworthy. Several of them have reported on this previously. But they ignored their own previous reporting and instead made immediate, sweeping claims about what had happened in the election. That kind of "reporting" sparks myths that stick around.
"There's this great political divergence, you know, between people who consume all the news sources that we know about and read about versus the people who don't."
People who know what's going on, and pay attention, voted overwhelmingly for Harris over Trump.
"The key question for the media to consider is why people other than committed liberals aren't paying attention to them."
Do committed conservatives pay attention?
But what Trump is trying to do, of course, is to blow so much smoke and throw so much dust, that people give up on the truth and/or only believe what he is saying. Gaslighting on a national scale.
The ‘news’ has certainly changed to being more opinionated. For that I blame social media. Now we can read all of the often uneducated opinions from millions of people. I am older and still read news…. often Reuters but others national and local. I watch PBS and BBC trying to get some world news beyond politics. Of course the Trump era is a disaster for trying get un opinionated and non political news. Ever since he labeled everything fake news people listen to him believing everything he says. Duh! Watching people get snookered is painful. I also think I became a news junkie after 9/11. It is a tough world but when it comes to human nature there is ‘nothing new under the sun’.
I hear you! And because just about everyone now has the ability to broadcast their opinions through social media and apps, we need big news agencies with massive budgets to be fierce, establishing themselves as trustworthy sources of definitive, fact checked information at all times.
Thanks for publishing this, The Contrarian. If big media, with their huge budgets, would commit to telling the truth always, they'd have a real shot at reaching many, many more people. More info: https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/the-media-was-wrong-about-the-elections
It certainly did not help that during the four Biden years, every single day there were far more pictures and articles of the orange felon than of our sitting president in the MSM!
It is one reason why I no longer read ANY MSM (other than the Guardian, which is funded by readers and donors - and I donate monthly) after canceling my subscription to The Washington Post in October 2024. I simply do not trust any of them any longer.
I don't blame you. The revolution would be for a news agency to commit to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth! That's what I focus on. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/the-hostages-and-a-truth-countermovement
They have actively worked to earn no trust.
Well put! Imagine if there was a major news outlet you could turn to and know that you would only get truth, which (as I say on They Stand Corrected) = facts + context.
That’s exactly what this platform is. The status quo is no longer needed. I don’t need to hear pundits pontificating on loop telling me about what I can see with my own eyes in real time. They made themselves obsolete.
Agree. The mainstream media was enraptured with Trump and downplayed his wacko statements and rallies but kept on Biden as too old. And Harris too progressive. And look what we have now. An economy which was good under Biden BEING TRASHED by Trump. Great job, corporate media. Gonna get your tax breaks now? As your businesses tank?
That's part of it, yes. They also fall for the outrage cycle. Reporting on insane things he says and does ultimately helps him set the agenda and takes attention away from other things that could really hit home for people. The people pulling Trump's strings understand these huge vulnerabilities in the media. https://joshlevs.com/episode-25-the-medias-gullibility/
I'm a news junkie, but I have canceled every subscription except the Atlantic and I never wasted my time watching cable news. Corporate media has become every bit as bad as Faux Noise. I'll spend my money on true journalists on Substack instead.
Yes! https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/a-free-legal-way-to-access-virtually
The Guardian does a decent job along with The Atlantic.
Yes, I subscribe to the Guardian. Just forgot to include it. They are doing great work.
I've seen critiques saying too liberal or too conservative were the reasons for the electrical outcome, as well as the political gravity of being underwater for popularity as an incumbent party.
I think Bernie and AOC have it right, we need real populist policies that support the people and not corporations.
Start with End Citizens United (need a constitutional amendment? Let's do it), move to public funding for elections (elected positions are not just for the well heeled), corporations aren't people, they are creatures of the state for the benefit of 'we the people' by limiting personal liability.
If the Washington Post is considered legacy media, it's losing its journalists. We all know that Jennifer Rubin left and is here. Ann Telenaes is gone, followed by Ruth Marcus, and Gene Robinson. We might do well to remind Dana Milbank and Max Boot to turn off the lights when they leave. Policies there since Jeff Bezos and William Lewis took the helm have downgraded this once fine newspaper.
Re the Washington Post: https://joshlevs.com/episode-30-election-night-warning/
That lack of an endorsement has only gotten worse. The news accounts are being filtered out and opinion writers are being censored. The 'Comments' segments of articles and opinions are often more enlightening than the content of the paper's producers.
I guess I was ahead of the curve. They lost me decades ago.
The problem is not with the legacy national news outlets.
The loss of local news is the bedrock problem. Local newspapers, print or online, that focus a voter's attention on what the city council is doing, is much more important because the actions of the city council have immediate impact on a voter's life.
Read the LWV Washington State study that started focusing attention on how the lack of local news impacts communities and undermines democracy. This is a free pdf.
https://www.lwvwa.org/resources/Documents/Studies/LocalNews/Decline%2036.pdf
The loss of local news is part of the problem, absolutely. I discussed that here: https://joshlevs.com/episode-45-political-lens-removal/
And corporate owners often guide remaining local outlets to similar journalistic failures. Meanwhile, big national agencies are the ones with the budgets to lead the fight for truth. They refuse.
This is excellent on decline of news. Remember the Newseum in DC? That was an excellent museum about the free press around the world and nationally. I think sadly it closed. I can’t imagine getting my news from social media!
Thanks. Yes, the museum you are referring to did close. Meanwhile, what we need is a trustworthy source that sets aside agendas and gives us the two ingredients of truth at all times: facts+context!
As a now retired librarian, I still expect main stream media to report the facts and cannot believe the MSM wouldn't bother to fact check.
Having spent 20 years in MSM, and now as someone who fact checks the MSM, I can tell you: Very often, they don't. theystandcorrected.substack.com
I am stunned that the author nit-picks legacy media for not fact-checking (?) and having 'liberal bias" while right-wing media blatantly issues propaganda and outright lies! Also, many readers do NOT want the truth, in contrast to the author's assertion; they want "news" that confirms their preexisting beliefs. The fundamental problem is right-wing media! An electorate that seeks out and consumes garbage will vote for garbage. (Witness our present administration.)
Actually, I call out right-wing media all the time. However, that part is discussed repeatedly in "mainstream" outlets. It is their go-to response. What they are not doing is ensuring that only report truth at all times. Lots of people have learned not to trust them either. https://joshlevs.com/episode-45-political-lens-removal/
I think it's a mistake to equate the labels people assign to themselves and others vs. the reality of their policy preferences. In addition, the right wing echochamber is particularly effective at branding their opponents, which often goes unanswered by Democrats.
I hear you. Personally I reject labels. I say: Let's conserve what's working well, progress in all the ways we need to, and move forward based on truth and justice.
I've listened to Josh's 51st recording and found it interesting. However, I think he betrays his credibility on the topic of Palestine. He gives the international and local history of the negotiation of the two states, and I have no doubt that it is accurate. But what it ignores is that the Palestinians had been living on that land for centuries, primarily as farmers and herders. The creation of a Jewish state, while done legally according to the then world powers, overlooks the fact that the influx of Jewish people put Palestinians off what had been their land. A somewhat parallel example would be if Native Americans would be given back half of Manhattan, though even that would be more credible as it's only about 4 centuries since they were hoodwinked into selling it. The Palestinians are understandably irate over having been pushed off their land. Many of them became refugees because of what was done in the 1940s.
This comment stream is for the topic I wrote about in thus piece. Any responses to other topics I fact check in my podcast should come through the two feedback systems I discuss in every episode. Not here.
*this*
OK, I missed that direction. Would you please let me know where it is, and I'll do it that way. Thanks
What a tall tale you just weaved. Thanks for telling me you hate Jewish people.
I am not persuaded. Of course, the legacy media cannot have the benefit of later surveys in depth. But that is not a sign of much. I not the absence of examples of distorted legacy media coverage. I stopped subscribing, not because of its coverage of the news, but because of its lousy editorial pages--too trendy by half.
News agencies had every reason to know that exit polls are not trustworthy. Several of them have reported on this previously. But they ignored their own previous reporting and instead made immediate, sweeping claims about what had happened in the election. That kind of "reporting" sparks myths that stick around.
"There's this great political divergence, you know, between people who consume all the news sources that we know about and read about versus the people who don't."
People who know what's going on, and pay attention, voted overwhelmingly for Harris over Trump.
"The key question for the media to consider is why people other than committed liberals aren't paying attention to them."
Do committed conservatives pay attention?
But what Trump is trying to do, of course, is to blow so much smoke and throw so much dust, that people give up on the truth and/or only believe what he is saying. Gaslighting on a national scale.
The ‘news’ has certainly changed to being more opinionated. For that I blame social media. Now we can read all of the often uneducated opinions from millions of people. I am older and still read news…. often Reuters but others national and local. I watch PBS and BBC trying to get some world news beyond politics. Of course the Trump era is a disaster for trying get un opinionated and non political news. Ever since he labeled everything fake news people listen to him believing everything he says. Duh! Watching people get snookered is painful. I also think I became a news junkie after 9/11. It is a tough world but when it comes to human nature there is ‘nothing new under the sun’.
I hear you! And because just about everyone now has the ability to broadcast their opinions through social media and apps, we need big news agencies with massive budgets to be fierce, establishing themselves as trustworthy sources of definitive, fact checked information at all times.