Y'know, I've been mulling this over in my head all day, and yeah we're just randos on the internet--but why not go hash out a central problem of the modern media?
Here's my thinking: MSM's job is to make money. To do that, they need clicks and viewers. If they report on every shit thing Trump says, as he does constantly, they will get fewer viewers because we all *know* Trump is an asshole who says horrific things, him saying another one is on a literal level not news because it's not new.
At core here is the problem of the normalization of Trump. I view that as a cognitive, social phenomenon more than anything else. It's worth being aware of and keeping an eye on, but demanding he not be normalized is demanding that people fight their own brains. I think it's more valuable to call out the most relevant instances than to invest in the everyday normal stuff, and that's the angle I judge the media from.
Anyway, thanks for the food for thought! It is important to keep this from being so normal we forget that it's only normal because it's normalized.
Okay so to be clear: the solution is to regulate the media, and make it semi-nonprofit right? I could get on board with that (especially if we do it with healthcare at the same time).
I do think you're over-selling the virtue of "2 sides" journalism, though. Firstly, there's often much more than 2 side. Secondly, that framework has actually been a key part of the very thing we started our disagreement over: normalizing Trump. Covering Trump as if he was just 'the other side' makes it seem like he is just another side in the endless 2-sides narrative
Y'know, I've been mulling this over in my head all day, and yeah we're just randos on the internet--but why not go hash out a central problem of the modern media?
Here's my thinking: MSM's job is to make money. To do that, they need clicks and viewers. If they report on every shit thing Trump says, as he does constantly, they will get fewer viewers because we all *know* Trump is an asshole who says horrific things, him saying another one is on a literal level not news because it's not new.
At core here is the problem of the normalization of Trump. I view that as a cognitive, social phenomenon more than anything else. It's worth being aware of and keeping an eye on, but demanding he not be normalized is demanding that people fight their own brains. I think it's more valuable to call out the most relevant instances than to invest in the everyday normal stuff, and that's the angle I judge the media from.
Anyway, thanks for the food for thought! It is important to keep this from being so normal we forget that it's only normal because it's normalized.
Okay so to be clear: the solution is to regulate the media, and make it semi-nonprofit right? I could get on board with that (especially if we do it with healthcare at the same time).
I do think you're over-selling the virtue of "2 sides" journalism, though. Firstly, there's often much more than 2 side. Secondly, that framework has actually been a key part of the very thing we started our disagreement over: normalizing Trump. Covering Trump as if he was just 'the other side' makes it seem like he is just another side in the endless 2-sides narrative