Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The American Press Is Destroying Itself

taibbi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 618 posts

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#251

Post by goatinaboat »

free_rms wrote: post #48
scott_s wrote: post #33

Counterpoint, from Ezra Klein of Vox ( https://www.vox.com/2020/6/10/21284651/new-york-times-tom-co... ): > There have always been boundaries around acceptable discourse, and the media has always been involved, in a complex and often unacknowledged way, in both enforcing and contesting them. In 1986, the media historian Daniel Hallin argued that journalists treat ideas as belonging to three spheres, each of which is…

That sounds like uncritical support for manufacturing consent, to me. I mean it's not like taibbi is speaking up for child molesters. He turned out to be factually right about a lot of this stuff, but it was completely unacceptable to say so.

I mean it's not like taibbi is speaking up for child molesters

Unlike, say, the NY Times https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/pedophilia-a-diso...

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#252

Post by spats1990 »

refurb wrote: post #217
stefantalpalaru wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Democrats are not “left”. They’d barely pass for center across the pond. Centre-right to right: https://politicalcompass.org/uselection2020

Everything looks "center-right to right" when you're on the extreme left.

Hard to parse what you mean here. The link is indirectly about the Overton window in US politics wherein views and policies considered centrist or center-left at most in other Western democracies appear "extreme left" in the context of US politics. Conversely, mainstream right-wing views in the US appear extremely right-wing in the context of other Western democracies. The linked page attempts to demonstrate through comparison to other Western democracies that the views or proposed policies of "left" or "extreme left" US politicians are contextually leftist, not objectively.

(edit: I get that "objectively" is probably not the correct word to use there, but I hope you get my meaning; it would be nice if someone could suggest a better one. Probably better to just have written "the views or proposed policies of 'left' or 'extreme left' US politicians are only contextually leftist").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#253

Post by rdtsc »

fzeroracer wrote: post #212
tptacek wrote: post #207

It's a little rich seeing Matt Taibbi, of all people, raising the alarm about "moral manias".

Considering Taibbi's journalistic history and remarks in the past, it is incredibly hypocritical to say the least. He's directly contributed to the reason why American Press is the way it is today so I can't tell if he honestly thinks he's somehow above it all or not.

Conversely, we could say that if even Taibbi is worried about moral outrages, things have gotten really bad.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#254

Post by thisiszilff »

danaris wrote: post #30
phaus wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Centrists would be somewhat rare it it hadn't become a slur for both extremes to label anyone that's not an extremist. Moderates are far more common than centrists. But these day's you're either completely toxic and insane or you get ridiculed as a centrist for not caring enough.

[flagged]

The charitable interpretation of the centrists position is trying to straddle the line between "I believe the government should be responsible for intervening in order to secure equal outcomes for all people" and "I believe individuals should be responsible for their owns lives and own outcomes." Or something along those lines. Centrists are not centrists because they embrace some negative, immoral 'other side', but because they recognize the other side has it's own values that are good and worth preserving. Many centrists likely see themselves as trying to strike a balance between these values.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#255

Post by djohnston »

danaris wrote: post #30
phaus wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Centrists would be somewhat rare it it hadn't become a slur for both extremes to label anyone that's not an extremist. Moderates are far more common than centrists. But these day's you're either completely toxic and insane or you get ridiculed as a centrist for not caring enough.

[flagged]

Lol this sentiment is exactly the problem being discussed and you've inadvertently provided a great example for the thread to examine. Thanks!

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#256

Post by tptacek »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #242
tptacek wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you seeing that Sullivan has left New York Magazine? (Sullivan should shut up about this particular controversy; he has not covered himself in glory on this issue in the past, and has no extra credibility here to burn).

Sullivan is on some kind of weird double secret probation and quite unhappy about it. I do not understand the comment about his not having credibility to burn. Opinion columnists aren't jockeying to run for class president. They're supposed to take various opinions in order for ideas to be more fully fleshed out. If the only purpose of the opinion section is to say things that reflect well on you or cover you in glor…

He can say whatever he wants, of course, but should not be surprised when he takes comparatively more flak for venturing forth on issues involving race. New York Magazine is a business, and can make their own decisions about whether that flak is worth absorbing. Certainly, his ideas on these topics don't seem to be worth much on their own merits.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#257

Post by dang »

jtbayly wrote: post #157
falcolas wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which has been marked as [flagged] and has fewer comments than this one. IMO, the dupe flag should be removed from this one, or merge the two and boost them back up.

Yes, or at least be honest that the reason this was removed is because it is flagged, not because it was a dupe.

83 points and dozens of comments is well over the threshold for considering a repost a dupe (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html), whether or not it was flagged, and generally speaking that threshold should be tightened if an article was flagged, not loosened. Otherwise flagging doesn't mean very much.

I made the call to turn the flags off on this one and merge the comments from the previous thread in here, because the discussion has been managing to stay (barely) on the ok side, and the article seems to me to be about an interesting new phenomenon (a la https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#259

Post by cplanas »

ashtonkem wrote: post #228
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #62

I don't think they are. I think they are optimizing for survival. Serious news is expensive, and at this point, a niche market. Few people would consume it (or even be capable of doing so), even fewer are ready to pay the real price of it. So they did the next best thing: they changed to please the market in a way that makes money. Grabbing a lot of attention, as cheaply as possible, so that you can sell it to the hi…

The press as a high minded arbiter of truth is a relatively new concept; historically journalism has been bitterly partisan and often misleading at best. Arguably the current trend is a return to historical norms, not an aberration to be feared.

The current trend may not be an aberration, but it should be feared.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#260

Post by WalterBright »

maest wrote: post #244
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #62

I don't think they are. I think they are optimizing for survival. Serious news is expensive, and at this point, a niche market. Few people would consume it (or even be capable of doing so), even fewer are ready to pay the real price of it. So they did the next best thing: they changed to please the market in a way that makes money. Grabbing a lot of attention, as cheaply as possible, so that you can sell it to the hi…

The most common way the free market fails to do the "right" thing is by ignoring externalities. By optimising for user engagement, media is ignoring the effect it has over society at large. This is actually an argument for government sponsored news outlets implemented in a politically neutral manner; i.e. the television shouldn't just be a mouthpiece for the state/the ruling party. For an example of state-financed bu…

You're always beholden to the paymaster.
Post reply on HN