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

371–380 of 618 posts

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#371

Post by humanrebar »

adt2bt wrote: post #325
scruple wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can swap "left" and "right" in your comment and it would lose no substance and it's meaning would not change.

I don’t agree. The defining difference between the left and right to me is the propensity to advocate for change. The cultural left is a hodgepodge if smaller issues under one larger umbrella. You’ve got people who care about racism, climate change, money in politics, access to abortion, etc. All of whom are trying to change society in some way to deal with big problems we have. As a result, it’s incredibly messy. Th…

The right is the ones advocating for changes with respect to immigration, access to abortion, affirmative action, the tax code, the power of public service unions, and a whole host of other issues. The left is defending the status quo more than many seem to appreciate. More, the left seems to be more picky about morality issues, even, though the set of morals aren't sexual or religious (for instance), they are environmental and multicultural (for instance).

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#372

Post by titzer »

ls612 wrote: post #210
forgingahead wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People also seem to be unaware that howling mobs move on ...you just have to wait them out. Stand firm and they'll quickly find another target to bully.

Case in point: remember last year when the governor and the AG (I think?) of Virginia were caught in blackface 30 years ago and the lieutenant governor was revealed to have raped a woman in college 20 years ago? And they all refused to resign? Everyone forgot about that a month later.

> And they all refused to resign?

Which is why a system based on policing corruption through public outrage is doomed to fail. You need to have a system that has actual mechanisms--investigations, prosecutions, and convictions--to keep a lid on corruption. Public shaming doesn't work because the public has only so much attention span, and there is soooo much corruption.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#373

Post by tlear »

blickentwapft wrote: post #83

I’m getting to the point of just switching off. Whatever your opinion, there will be many others who deeply and vehemently disagree with you and do so with passionate, fiery, certain-to-be-correct righteous indignation. Carry your true opinions in your head and share them with no one.

Failed to take a knee or prostate yourself in front of whatever? Fired, cancelled etc

Having grown up during perestroika. I remember saluting the red banner and blood soaked monster Lenin portet while reading Archipelago Gulag at home.

Never though US will get here

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#374

Post by humanrebar »

jeremyjh wrote: post #326
scruple wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can swap "left" and "right" in your comment and it would lose no substance and it's meaning would not change.

What are the right's social initiatives? Can you name three?

Restricting access to abortion, promotion of alternatives to public schooling, and elaborating on religious freedoms especially where they run against social initiatives of the left.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#375

Post by AnthonyMouse »

arkades wrote: post #356
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm saying is that when black people kill more than ten times more black people than cops kill black people, somebody is not wrong to ask why the focus should only be on the cops.

Because one of those groups is a set of criminals that will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and the other one of those groups is a set of government agents with a history of not being held accountable for their actions. There's never been a lack of focus on intra-community violence. It's been the go-to "whataboutism" for ... ever. It's also not relevant to the question of why government authorities shoul…

> Because one of those groups is a set of criminals that will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and the other one of those groups is a set of government agents with a history of not being held accountable for their actions.

You could say that about both groups. There is a cultural tradition in the relevant communities of not talking to the police, which causes disproportionately many of those murderers to get away with it, and the murder solve rate in the US isn't all that high to begin with.

You tend to get more murders in proportion to how much the perpetrators expect to get away with it, so the numbers are telling a story there.

> There's never been a lack of focus on intra-community violence. It's been the go-to "whataboutism" for ... ever.

Apparently not to a sufficient extent to actually address the problem. If you don't want people to keep pointing to it then get there to not be something to point to.

> It's also not relevant to the question of why government authorities should be exempt from the consequences of violating the law.

The officers in question are facing homicide charges, as it should be.

You're just begging the question in limiting it to government authorities. If Black Lives Matter then shouldn't all of them?

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#376

Post by [deleted] »

noch wrote: post #319
alexashka wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scientific method is employed to solve particular problems. Which problems should we be solving? You cannot use the scientific method to answer that question. The best you can try and do is use empirical evidence and science to strengthen your position, in an attempt to convince others and/or yourself. This is not an original thought - it's a shame that it isn't more well known.

> Which problems should we be solving? You cannot use the scientific method to answer that question. The best you can try and do is use empirical evidence and science to strengthen your position, in an attempt to convince others and/or yourself. Demonstrably false. This belief is poisonous and should be avoided in all cases. (ask yourself how you decide whether to fix your plumbing or to buy a new couch, for instance…

[deleted]

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#377

Post by xtracto »

js2 wrote: post #305
Animats wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious news is expensive, and at this point, a niche market. I suspect that's correct. It's hard now to find any news outlet now that sticks to "Who, What, When, Where, Why". This is a consequence of pay per click, probably. The left and the right now both have a checklist of mandatory positions required to avoid punishment. Those positions are in many cases contrary to fact. That's not good. Denial has become a cor…

I'm 48. My family had a newspaper subscription (in my case, the Miami Herald). I've been a consumer of news all my life, mostly print media. (My family rarely watched local news except for when a hurricane was headed our way, but would often watch programs like 60 minutes.) When was the news ever "Who, What, When, Where, Why?" It's always had a slant as long as I remember. Here's "the most trusted man in America" cal…

I'm a Mexican living in mexico. When I was a kid? My dad was subscribed to Time Magazine. In my opinion it was quite informative and nin-skewed.

Nowadays I follow American news channels for entertainment (both CNN and Fox Bews are soooooo skewed). I usually go to CBSN or AlJazeera for 'boring' unskewed news.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#378

Post by phaus »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #365
mistermann wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Doesn't it make them a Nazi enabler, though? Calling Trump a nazi seems incredibly disrespectful to people and their family who actually lost their lives to real nazis. Are you aware that you don't actually know what Trump supporters think? That your opinion is based on heuristics running on top of the absolutely tiny sample of the real world that you've been exposed to, much of it likely incredibly biased if not o…

Are you aware that you don't actually know what Trump supporters think? I grew up with them. Trust me, I know what they think. This period of history may or may not be what Joe Strummer prepared us for, but it certainly looks like the one Hannah Arendt, Milton Mayer, and Alexander Solzhenitsyn prepared us for.

Did you grow up with 49% of the voters in this country, or are you generalizing them based on caricatured versions of your anecdotal experience?

I haven't and don't plan on voting for Trump. However, you can't generalize a group of people consisting of approximately 60 million very easily. Even if you can't fathom why they would support him, there's a wide variety of backgrounds, experiences, and ideologies within that massive group.

There are also many different political issues that have significant impacts on peoples' lives. Not everyone gets the same information about these issues. Even if they did, not everyone interprets and values them in the same exact way. I would bet most people voting for or against Trump are trying to do what they think will make the US a safe, fair, happy place to live. The problem is that many political issues are incredibly complex and most of them don't have clear cut solutions. Even in cases where they do, people still can't agree on the best course of action.

Some people like to hand wave the complexity away by taking the stance that "one party just wants freedom and equal rights for everyone and the other wants the opposite".

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#379

Post by pantalaimon »

ReptileMan wrote: post #161
remote_phone wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it fails. Look at how and why Trump was elected. All the polls showed Clinton being elected, because everyone was afraid to espouse their opinions. And yet they voted the way they wanted and NO ONE KNEW because true conversation was squashed. And this will keep happening over and over again until the fascist left finally understands that real conversation is what educated people, not cancelling anyone who dare…

To be fair the whole election hanged on a stadium full of people flipping. If Trump wins in November (like Johnson this year) it will be a better sign that people are pissed off at idpol.

> To be fair the whole election hanged on a stadium full of people flipping.

That seems to be a surprisingly common occurrence.

Re: The American Press Is Destroying Itself

#380

Post by ramphastidae »

js2 wrote: post #305
Animats wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious news is expensive, and at this point, a niche market. I suspect that's correct. It's hard now to find any news outlet now that sticks to "Who, What, When, Where, Why". This is a consequence of pay per click, probably. The left and the right now both have a checklist of mandatory positions required to avoid punishment. Those positions are in many cases contrary to fact. That's not good. Denial has become a cor…

I'm 48. My family had a newspaper subscription (in my case, the Miami Herald). I've been a consumer of news all my life, mostly print media. (My family rarely watched local news except for when a hurricane was headed our way, but would often watch programs like 60 minutes.) When was the news ever "Who, What, When, Where, Why?" It's always had a slant as long as I remember. Here's "the most trusted man in America" cal…

> What is that if not a partisan political opinion?

What was partisan about what he said? He made no mention of US political parties. He simply said that the war was failing and it needed to end. May I suggest you are projecting your partisanship onto this?

Objective journalism is not about giving both sides an equal voice. It is OK to use rationale and logic to support one side over the other. Should all journalism about evolution also include equal time for creationism?

Post reply on HN