Truthfully, I think the smart folks on both sides of the aisle know the news media is a for-profit business whose interests are tangential to telling the truth.
Truthfully, I think the smart folks on both sides of the aisle know the news media is a for-profit business whose interests are tangential to telling the truth.
You imply this is some kind of hypocrisy or other character flaw, but this will always be true when there's uncertainty. If someone holds the same prior beliefs as you, it is rational to trust them more. Otherwise you would be assuming your own beliefs are wrong which makes no sense by definition.
Of course media outlets tend to go beyond just filling in the blanks with biased guesses, but still people will be more forgiving if they seem "sensible" generally.
It may be rational, but that makes them terrible providers of news for the people they agree with. They have the same blind spots and are looking to support the narratives you both already believe.
Favoring information that confirms one's prior beliefs is the opposite of rational.
I don't think it detracts from your points, but the coverage of all these outlets leans Democrat, but not left. They are centrist papers. Left voices (think Chomsky) are almost completely absent from mainstream media.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunda...
Bernie on the other hand would fit in perfectly well with the SPD, our social democrats. "Die Linke", the leftest one in the article, is a joint party of the SED (the former DDRs government party), some communists from western Germany and the far left wing of the SPD. They are as much left as the AfD is right.
I do see a lot of parallels between the AfD and the right wing of the GOP so. Especially regarding immigrants, muslims, the Covid pandemic and views of family values.
International politics should be contextually anchored essentially. So you say "Party X from country Y is further left than part A from country B." That is putting aside "mixed political aspects". Is a communist country which outlaws homosexuality to the left or right of a free market capitalist country which has gay marriage?
Mixed political aspects are a good argument to be careful in discussing 'overall' political leanings. There are real-world mixups like you describe - for example, Marine Le Pen, while a frighteningly far right extremist on social and foreign policy issues, was to the left of someone like Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton on many economic policy aspects.
>Wanting to shift to a constitutional monarchy was once "the left"
Yes, in many places they still have names from back then. For example one of the biggest political parties from Denmark is named "Venstre" which literally means "Left", even though they are to the Right (conservative-liberal). Quite funny that a close match from Norway is called "Høyre" which means "Right". They rooted for Joe Biden in the election though and had a big party back when Obama won, because US Left is their Right to center-right and the republicans are just way too extreme for their taste.
Sure, it's true that the Democratic Party is to the left of the Republican Party, and that there are actual leftists in the DP, such as Bernie or AOC, but the vast majority of the party is centrist at best, especially on economic issues.
On many economic issues, Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi are on the right of someone like Marine LePen or Viktor Orban.
[0] the intersection of two axes measuring social and economic positions, popularized as the “political compass”
And in the real US, the Democratic party is to the right of a vast majority of its own voters' views, on issues such as Medicare for All most prominently, but others as well. It's even to the right of the views of large swaths of Republican voters on many issues, such as withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Democratic party is much closer to the Center of the political opinions of the US population, at least on economic and foreign policy matters (I would say it's well in the center-right of American political views actually on those matters). It may well be on the 'real left' on social and family matters, to be fair.
Not to mention, there are many other political forces and voices, which form a clear left pole far to the left of the Democratic party (I gave specific examples), and they have large amounts of increasingly organized support. They will likely pull the Democratic party to the left instead of establishing a pure leftist party, but that is far from having happened. You can look instead at how much the extreme right has been pulling the Republican party right to see the mechanisms
So the way I see it, the US population has left leaning people, right leaning people, and centrists. Looking at the relative opinions of the population, the Democratic party is overall in the Center, and the Republicans are well on the right (these are overall generalizations). Of course, in the absence of better choices, leftist voters will generally vote Democratic, as the Center is preferable to them than the Right.
More importantly for this claim, papers like the NYT and networks like CNN are explicitly cultivating centrist beliefs (especially on economic and foreign policy matters), often leaning far more to the right on such issues compared to the majority of the population (look at Brian Williams repulsive praise of the 'beauty of our weapons' on MSNBC[0] as they were reporting on a US missile attack on a Syrian base).
This doesn't limit the spectrum of opinions of individuals by any means but it does compel some degree of consensus and organization to mount a serious campaign.
> They will likely pull the Dem party to the left
Yes, the parties vacillate in how far left or right they are, and the center moves accordingly. Still, the center of US politics isn't defined by some "objective truth" it's defined by the relative position of the two political parties. Some ideas that have been centrist in the past are now extremist, some ideas that have been considered extreme in the past are now considered the accepted consensus.
I do think there are advantages to my definition - by your definition, the majority of the US population has an extreme left position on Medicare for all, as an example.
Funny that I link to a New Yorker article. Fitting that it is from 2012.
And yeah I guess I wasn't that surprised by MSNBC, but definitely didn't expect the percentages to be so high for the "paper of record" and NPR.
I completely agree with the point of hating the “other” guy’s news. I don’t think the vast majority of people distrust mainstream media. At least not their favorite outlets. NYT being beloved by a lot of my friends as one easy glaring example of typical highly educated well paid “liberal coastal elites”
* principled progressives/hard left have quite a bit in common with principled libertarians. Ron Paul being one. Not his son though. Chapo Traphouse for example can recognize Ron Paul being legit. Or Jon Stewart for a more mainstream example.
Perhaps that number is bigger than I’m imagining, but I doubt it. Edgy comments online saying Fox sucks for a week because they didn’t do a good enough job isn’t the same thing. That’s still on Fox’s side.
I don’t think the comparison is the same. Maybe for Democracy Now and some progressive YouTuber/online shows.
Seems like a lot. That's why OAN and Newsmax grew so fast.
> I don’t think the comparison is the same. Maybe for Democracy Now and some progressive YouTuber/online shows.
Democracy Now and TYT are the progressive version of OAN/Newsmax. MSNBC is the progressive version of Fox.
TYT and Democracy Now overlap, but TYT is almost purely neoliberal stuff. Perhaps I don’t understand the nuance between OAN/Newsmax though.
It’s not hard to dislike MSNBC and not watch it while being into Democracy Now. It makes sense. If you’re into Chapo Trap House, you’re completely opposed to MSNBC.
You can see the differences just from seeing how Reddit’s Ohanion did a classic neoliberal move weeks before Chapo’s ban of saying his board seat should go to a minority. A move MSNBC would say congrats, work accomplished to. Unlike progressives.
You can also see the general difference of how things are viewed based on the attention The Donald subreddit got for their ban vs Chapo. Trump’s subreddit was a 4-5x bigger, but took up almost all the news cycle vs the other subreddits.
It’s not as simple as Democracy Now on left is a mirror of Newsmax on the right.
Either way, we are mostly in agreement. We are talking about details vs any bigger disagreement.
Cheers