Seriously. Does anyone outside of a few extreme moonbats believe that the NYT actually has all the news that’s fit to print? Can you think of anyone not completely insane who thinks their political pages are actually equally hard on both parties?
Maybe it’s because I’m in the sub-30 age bracket… but I simply don’t know anyone who would believe another political piece by Dan Rather without checking Drudge, Wikipedia, or a blog.
And come on. Fox isn’t “mainstream”? If you’re watching Chris Matthews and not O’Reilly you’re weird. Even though we’re hearing about FNC’s ratings falling they’re still beating the competition. Heck. John Stewart is more mainstream than those dinosaurs.
The “Mainstream” Media is mainstream no more. Please. Call it the Old Media; call it the liberal media. But don’t call it mainstream.
We need to frame this debate. We are mainstream America; they are the fringe. We are the new America; they are the old. This is *our* country. This is our fight to lose.
What is more important in a debate, having the facts on your side or having the perception of being mainstream on your side?
Things such as this remind me of a quote from Ludwig von Mises:
The usual terminology of political language is stupid. What is “left†and what is “right� Why should Hitler be “right†and Stalin, his temporary friend, be “left� Who is “reactionary†and who is “progressive� Reaction against an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. “Orthodoxy†is not an evil if the doctrine on which the “orthodox†stand is sound. Who is anti-labor, those who want to lower labor to the Russian level, or those who want for labor the capitalistic standard of the United States? Who is “nationalist,†those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?
Framing the debate is pointless. It does not matter if the debate is framed around mainstream views versus fringe views. What matters is that you do the right thing.
tkc1,
Things such as this remind me of a quote from Ludwig von Mises:
The usual terminology of political language is stupid. What is “left†and what is “right� Why should Hitler be “right†and Stalin, his temporary friend, be “left� Who is “reactionary†and who is “progressive� Reaction against an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. “Orthodoxy†is not an evil if the doctrine on which the “orthodox†stand is sound. Who is anti-labor, those who want to lower labor to the Russian level, or those who want for labor the capitalistic standard of the United States? Who is “nationalist,†those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?
Great Quote!!!
I get sick of being put into a corner over devisive rhetoric. It’s always refreshing to hear that others agree (and say it better).
We need to frame this debate. We are mainstream America; they are the fringe. We are the new America; they are the old. This is *our* country. This is our fight to lose.
Who is “they” and how are they on the “fringe”? Do you mean the 31-35% who still think W is doing a good job or the other 2/3 of the country? There was certainly a point where the country was swinging conservative; Reagan was a hero and W had buckets of good will after 9/11 when everyone supported him, but that’s all lost.
All of this nonsense about the media’s insidious plot to turn everyone into liberals is a distraction. Even if that were their goal (and that’s certainly debatable), what good does it serve to frame things that way? Do you think people are going to stop watching CNN and reading the NYT? What’s necessary is that we all stop watching the talking heads / talking points crap they throw on the screen and encourage all networks to show us some careful examination of the issues. Otherwise we just become more divided as a country and nothing gets solved, and that only benefits our enemies. Complaining about the MSM being liberal is as valuable a conversation as liberals complaining about FNC.
If you see someone in the media saying something you disagree with then don’t ever watch them again. Or wait—here’s an idea: keep watching them and try to understand their point of view and see if there’s any common ground you can work with. I could hang out at DailyKos all day but it doesn’t teach me anything (other than the left fringe can be just as wacky as the right). I come here to try to find some honest debate from intelligent people who really want to save this country from the enemy. And by enemy I don’t mean the left, they are just Americans like you with a different way of achieving the same goals you have. I mean the real enemy—ignorant and rabid fundamentalists who want to destroy civilization.
Who is “they” and how are they on the “fringe”? Do you mean the 31-35% who still think W is doing a good job or the other 2/3 of the country?
Neither. I mean the biased journalists who try to convince us that conservatism = hatred/bigotry/idiocy and that their liberalism is really just compassion or intelligence.
Liberal_Jeff - 17 November 2006 10:31 PM
All of this nonsense about the media’s insidious plot to turn everyone into liberals is a distraction.
That’s where I was headed with this. I keep hearing conservatives complain that the NYT loses our elections for us. Hogwash! We’ve got Fox (yes, I’ll admit they tilt to the right), we’ve got Rush and Laura and Hannity and Powerline and FR and LGF. We’ve got parts of the Post and the presidency and (for another month or so) the majority in both houses of Congress. If all that’s not enough to counteract the Old Media then that’s *our* fault, not theirs.
Liberal_Jeff - 17 November 2006 10:31 PM
Do you think people are going to stop watching CNN and reading the NYT?
Yes. In fact, they already are.
Liberal_Jeff - 17 November 2006 10:31 PM
Complaining about the MSM being liberal is as valuable a conversation as liberals complaining about FNC.
Who’s complaining? Of course the old media is biased to the left. And? Are we ever going to change the NYT by moaning and groaning? Not likely. And calling them “mainstream” just gives us an excuse not to fight back.
Seriously. Does anyone outside of a few extreme moonbats believe that the NYT actually has all the news that’s fit to print? Can you think of anyone not completely insane who thinks their political pages are actually equally hard on both parties?
Maybe it’s because I’m in the sub-30 age bracket… but I simply don’t know anyone who would believe another political piece by Dan Rather without checking Drudge, Wikipedia, or a blog.
And come on. Fox isn’t “mainstream”? If you’re watching Chris Matthews and not O’Reilly you’re weird. Even though we’re hearing about FNC’s ratings falling they’re still beating the competition. Heck. John Stewart is more mainstream than those dinosaurs.
The “Mainstream” Media is mainstream no more. Please. Call it the Old Media; call it the liberal media. But don’t call it mainstream.
I quit calling them the MSM ages ago. I started calling the NY Times, CBS, etc. the Agenda Media on Let Freedom Ring Blogabout 2 years ago.
I’ll donate a dollar to any cause to encourage Rush to move to the other side. Bush one could have done with out his help and the recent vote wasn’t helped by Rush’s rants.
This whole New Media situation is one of the challenges of our time. We are all damed if you do and damed if you don’t. Think about it, unless you are part of what ever is going on around the world the only truth you will or can ever know is through some News Media.
You can’t call these any kind of news media when every media has a personal agenda. The Republicans lost the most recent election not because they knew something special about one candidate verses another. It is because the Liberal news Media have been working since 1994 to regain the congress for the Democrats.
The single most dangerous aspect of our information saturated era is the News Media.
Fox has found a great formula for economic success in their particular niche and their either-or populist polarization of every issue. It’s good drama, until the schtick of any partical leftie or rightie becomes so predictable that you begin to laugh...or groan.
I believe that this country has to be run from the center, with occasional tilts to the left or right, depending on a thousand shifting variables of war/peace, boom/bust, the relative prosperity of entrepreneurs vs workers etc.
Polarization is dramatic and titillating, but we have to figure out what the hell to do here. I wouldn’t swear to it, but I think that the McGlaughlin Group sometimes gives a more balanced view overall, not that it too isn’t polarized, but you get a chance to hear about possible compromises, gray areas, things which MIGHT work, a bit more than I hear from most Foxies. Probably Foxes
best balanced crew is Williams, Barnes, Kondracke, and Hume. Once you throw Kristol in, the whole things lists inordinately rightward.
And will some please drown Richard Morris. What a slimeball!
And, oh yeah, the fact that “Mr Speaker Gingrich” appears on Fox several times a week as a political commentator, would be like having Bill Clinton, or actually someone considerably to the left of him appear on the MSM regularly as a “commentator.”
If Fox were truely balanced, they would have some Gingrich equivalent from the left. Newt isn’t usually on with any other balancing talking head, but just gets to throw his “wisdom” at a number of topics for 5-10 minutes, several times a week. Hey, at least Fox knows how to feed their base. :-)
Dwight, as opposed to George Stephanopolis? Do you know how many commentators in the non-Fox media are former officials from Democratic political organizations and campaigns?
Still, I think the media (I prefer “legacy media” myself) has shown that they aren’t quite toothless yet. They had no small part in the outcome of the last election.
I also have a bad feeling that many of the people dropping out of newspapers and network news are simply not getting news at all. Headlines off the radio while they brush their teeth, maybe.
