The Mark Zuckerberg Manifesto Is a Blueprint for Destroying Journalism

It doesn't matter how many Pulitzers the NYT has if they print Judith Miller garbage. The NYT are the paragons of wishful news. I unsubscribed from them early during this last election because they were selling bullshit. And boy! Was that a good decision or what!

How many of the people who hold up the NYT as some ideal actually subscribe? I'll be surprised if it's anything but a tiny number. Journalism is dying because journalists think they should write about what they want to be true. And the NYT is leading that charge.

I'll tell you something, though. They had a couple of very good articles that really stood out. And those also had exceptional prose.

There are media codes of conduct. There are anti-discrimination laws. There are departments set up for supervising ethics. There are even people appointed specifically to monitor and stop prejudice.

You would assume this would stop lying, manipulating, bullying and prejudice by the media but it does not. As an example, Hillary Clinton's exit speech was particularly sexist and _nobody_ in the media took her to task, "And to all the little girls who are watching this, never doubt that you are valuable, and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world to pursue and achieve your own dreams." https://www.google.com.au/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3843541

It's just one of many examples of prejudice and injustice that are pushed aggressively by almost every media outlet. When did we ever exclude kids based on their gender so blatantly and with such pride? How far we've regressed.

A school near me is doing the same thing (Mount Carmel College). A co-ed school that shows almost only girls in their pictures/website/billboards, yet, there is not a single complaint from anyone. There is so much discrimination from so many sources that you'd have to be blind not to notice it. It's despicable to declare a gender war on little boys, yet, I see no one protesting, especially ideologies that talk the most about prejudice.

Any time people point out these prejudices in public, you hear some glib comments about 50 years ago. You pull out the newspapers from 50 years ago to illustrate revisionist history and it is suddenly 100 years ago. This problem is systemic.

The truth is that humanity seems to need a bogey man. Today, that's likely the "all Muslims are terrorists" and "any white male is privileged (irrespective of age)", leading to some extreme bullying.

The only way for extremism to stop is to meet it head on, yet, not one "reputable" media outlet is willing to do so. Some say Breitbart is good, but, I found it sexist to the same degree that Ars Technica, The Verge, New York Times, etc are, just targeting the opposite gender. However, Breitbart is in the overwhelming minority (ie. sexist favouring males is the ~1% of media today).

What we need is decent people willing to tackle the prejudice. For some reason, the protests of decent people remain almost unheard. Whether it's domestic violence by women, overwhelming predominance of male suicide, predominance of male cancer, overwhelming predominance of male homelessness, overwhelming predominance of male incarceration, extreme prejudice against boys in school education or any other male oriented topic, the media manipulates, lies, misrepresents and bullies. To give a small example, how many times have you heard prostate cancer is a joke and almost nobody dies from it? Compare the stats yourself: MORE incidents than breast cancer and MORE deaths, despite the constant snipes by many media outlets to the contrary. https://prostate-cancer.canceraustralia.gov.au/statistics https://canceraustralia.gov.au/affected-cancer/cancer-types/...

Society desperately needs people to protest vigorously. Hold Ars Technica, The Verge, Vox, Vulture, Daily Beast, New York Times, BBC, News Corp, etc accountable. Throw the book at the lot of them! Huge fines will fund more cases against other media outlets.

>it's the fact that half this country does not care for fact vs fiction.

I believe it's less to do with not caring to not understanding the system. Coming from a world where newspapers ensured to report only correct info and corrected incase of error. People expect that the internet is also the same. Many are surprised to know that Wikipedia articles are peer submitted and reviewed. Many assumed its from a company like Encyclopaedia Britannica. Just an online version, instead of the heavy books.

Have you ever read the Daily Mail?