We don't need a Fox news for progressives. We need to publicly shame Fox news viewers for being brain-washed tools. The Soviet empire finally got to the point that anyone who believed and spouted Pravda was immediately recognized as an idiot or a paid government agent. It only took 30 years for them to get there...
Thanks for keeping up the good fight in spite of the scarcity of rich donors who are committed to (f)actual journalism as opposed to propaganda promoting their personal political ideologies/bottom lines.
Every time I think your writing is just too bitter for me, you write something that makes me realize the acidity is medicinal. I just subscribed - hang in there.
Mr. Nolan is indeed a man of great passion, with an acid tongue, but in these times of participation trophies and all-too-liberal both-sidesism, he is indeed cleansing.
Excellent example of how you think in solutions, rather than hand-wringing. You seem to have overlooked a key part of the solution: Local journalism. These same feckless billionaires could spread their support over the widest possible area by relatively minor investments. The first thing to do would be to teach local outlets how to sell advertising again.
Rich donors who want to truly have an effect on The Discourse need far thicker skins and a commitment the truth that our current crop of libertarian goons possesses. Someone like Jeff Bezos can't accept that his newspaper might be critical of him or his peers or in any affect his NASA-cosplay hobby.
Any plutocrat who wants to own a newspaper should never read it unless they can handle criticism, unless they accept Ralph McGIll's dictum of a newspaper's responsibility to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Ted Turner hired the publisher of the LATimes to run CNN and then stepped out of the way. Today's oligarchs are too insecure to allow that.
I may write something else on this in the future but I think there's a clear distinction between rich people who own media outlets in some sort of public spirit and rich people who own media outlets as a tool for their own political power. Bezos might have started out more or less in the first category but now is clearly moving towards the second.
Bezo's ex wife is giving billions away to help others. She could buy media outlets to also help others by promoting truth, science and equal rights for all.
Otherwise the billions she gives away will be ineffective long term to ending the cause of the their problems. So when her money is gone and the problems persist it seems like a huge waste.
Of course I find her generosity to be honorable. It's up to her how she wants to direct it.
Maybe she hasn't considered this at all?
Has Bill Gates?
He can give billions away but if he really wants clean water and vaccines to be effective having the US government decimate his efforts both domestically and internationally makes his silence in the last election quite ignorant.
He could buy up media yet he has not. Heck, he could buy up the services that such media rely on.
He could have bought Twitter. He did not.
So his inaction allowed Elon to turn public opinion
He's shorted Tesla stock and made money. He could use that to buy up media or to start a competitor to Twitter and Facebook. Crickets though. Shame.
Zuckerberg does own Facebook yet he's allowed it to become a haven for conspiracy theories and lies. He's weak. I don't see Murdoch allowing others on to lie unless it is the lies he wants told.
Only takes a few determined zealots with an agenda to get others to meekly acquiesce.
How to get millions and even billions to follow along? Way too easy for a populist and his small group of cohorts.
Even when we know better it still happens and is happening now in real time.
Many delude themselves about some past where there were journalistic standards.
Sure, Fox is propaganda is disguised as a regular "news" show.
Our "journalists" for years have given the American people an illusion of some free press. Such outlets have always been owned by wealthy individuals while if not exactly a Murdoch as an owner were still extremely biased towards their own interests.
I can turn on MSM outlets that for example allow a Lindsey Graham on to lie. Giving false equivalence to lies over actual facts and truth. It has been considered standard journalism for decades if not longer.
When presenting two "sides" and letting the people decide is considered "journalism" there is a problem.
Present facts only.
Accepting "ads" that are lies for money by "networks" or other such news outlets renders any actual reporting meaningless.
These relentless ads shown over and over in easy to digest soundbites are not overcome by some journalist on the same outlet reporting the truth in an hours long format once a year.
Humans don't have the time or the ability to spend on such subjects.
The human mind can't easily discern fact from fiction. Many trust too easily.
They need facts and truth only. In simple terms. Consistently.
It is impossible for most to overcome something they believe to be true that is actually false.
So turn on the news. Do an experiment of MSM.
Weather, sports, celebrity nonsense, car accidents, some limited reporting on foreign affairs, and constant coverage of a known narcissistic lying day and night 24/7. Leaving many scrambling to fact check his lies while also allowing others on to reinforce those lies. Fox is worse but I'm not seeing many journalists. They lack the backbone to stand up to the liars. Cut the mike. Turn off the camera the second they lie. Or don't go at all.
Sure there are a few credible journalists out there that stick to facts only. Yet, our system doesn't allow for the time to ascertain the facts. Reporting news isn't journalism. Reporting what others say isn't journalism. Reporting is about getting views and then selling ads to pay the bills. No viewers, no ads and no money.
So an owner with deep pockets that cares about truth might want to invest in the actual truth. Why?
When has Fascism worked for the wealthy? Never. Short term sure. Long term they always end in disaster.
Is it good to be an oligarch in a country with no rule of law but a dictator? No. That dictator can easily kill a billionaire and disappear them overnight for no reason at all.
Is it good to be a billionaire in a country where you need guards 24/7? Where one fears for their life constantly? Where disease spreads easily? It's quite stressful way to live.
The rich can catch polio and measles.
Bezos is afraid. Zuckerberg is afraid. As are others.
To be that wealthy and afraid of some part time elected employee of the American people can't be considered good by them. Fired once for being a buffoon and now he's trying to outdo his prior incompetence. With the backing of many of the wealthy.
Well they are discovering NOW that he really is not going to help them make money. He cares only about making money for himself. At their expense.
The My Pillow guy never figured it out.
Will they ever?
Dictators don't want competition. Do these billionaires want to risk all they have for the promise of more riches they don't need?
None want to move to Russia. The Kochs might have business there but won't live there.
Elon might want fascism but does he want to live in Russia or China?
Their money isn't their money in those countries. It's only theirs at the whim of the dictator. No real rule of law exists.
It's where we are headed.
They need to wake up or they will lose big time.
Others if they have the means to do so, along with the honor, intelligence, integrity and love of our Constitution need to step up.
I believe that the media has never been objective. They either favour the left or the right and as a result are propagandists for their chosen side. CNN is no more objective than FOX, they lie too, just for their side. In Canada we have the CBC who are beholden to the Liberal party because in essence they are supported by the Canadian Government. So they will never bite the hand that feeds them. How can we expect objectivity. Also now we have had generations of people coming up who know nothing about critical thinking and University students who do not know how to be media literate who are turned into activists by their professors. Failures on multiple levels on purpose for those who want to divide and conquer.
I also think that I, Hamilton, like you, meaning journalists who used to rely on the paychecks issued by others and now run our own shops, should tell more writers to just do it. Start the newsletter. Launch the podcast. Begin the YouTube channel. There are fewer barriers to entry than ever before. With good clear writing and an entrepreneurial bent, we don't need to rely on the rich dudes to come in and tell our publications how to report and write and edit stories. We can do that ourselves now.
That's the thing I wish more journalists understood. It reminds me of a Carlos Santana quote: "The biggest cancer on this planet is that not enough people believe in their own light."
I agree with you to a certain extent but building a startup thing into a legit full time job is not a guaranteed prospect for a lot of journalists who need a steady paycheck to survive each month. Ideally we could just have a sustainable industry of union jobs.
What about propaganda that is simply money or favors between individual government agencies or Congress or government (and contractor) or Supreme Court-based powers and the journalists themselves? What should be done about that? A propaganda law? Punishing whom? A lot of worry about wealthy people who don't really exist when the media has always been owned by wealthy people, not enough concern about the real problem.
Amen, Amen and Halleluiah, Amen.
We don't need a Fox news for progressives. We need to publicly shame Fox news viewers for being brain-washed tools. The Soviet empire finally got to the point that anyone who believed and spouted Pravda was immediately recognized as an idiot or a paid government agent. It only took 30 years for them to get there...
I’m reserving my publicly shaming arrows for anyone defending the state of Israel, in any context. That’s Mount Rushmore level of brain-washed tool.
https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/israel-is-a-uniquely-evil-society
Not just Fox, it's almost all journalism. Bobblheads at a prompter saying the same story.
"A good newspaper is a nation talking to itself." - Arthur Miller.
Or - in our case - a nation bullshitting itself.
Excellent piece!
Thanks for keeping up the good fight in spite of the scarcity of rich donors who are committed to (f)actual journalism as opposed to propaganda promoting their personal political ideologies/bottom lines.
Every time I think your writing is just too bitter for me, you write something that makes me realize the acidity is medicinal. I just subscribed - hang in there.
Mr. Nolan is indeed a man of great passion, with an acid tongue, but in these times of participation trophies and all-too-liberal both-sidesism, he is indeed cleansing.
Old (possibly apocryphal) quote: "News Is What Somebody Does Not Want You To Print. All the Rest Is Advertising."
Excellent example of how you think in solutions, rather than hand-wringing. You seem to have overlooked a key part of the solution: Local journalism. These same feckless billionaires could spread their support over the widest possible area by relatively minor investments. The first thing to do would be to teach local outlets how to sell advertising again.
Rich donors who want to truly have an effect on The Discourse need far thicker skins and a commitment the truth that our current crop of libertarian goons possesses. Someone like Jeff Bezos can't accept that his newspaper might be critical of him or his peers or in any affect his NASA-cosplay hobby.
Any plutocrat who wants to own a newspaper should never read it unless they can handle criticism, unless they accept Ralph McGIll's dictum of a newspaper's responsibility to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Ted Turner hired the publisher of the LATimes to run CNN and then stepped out of the way. Today's oligarchs are too insecure to allow that.
I may write something else on this in the future but I think there's a clear distinction between rich people who own media outlets in some sort of public spirit and rich people who own media outlets as a tool for their own political power. Bezos might have started out more or less in the first category but now is clearly moving towards the second.
One example.
Bezo's ex wife is giving billions away to help others. She could buy media outlets to also help others by promoting truth, science and equal rights for all.
Otherwise the billions she gives away will be ineffective long term to ending the cause of the their problems. So when her money is gone and the problems persist it seems like a huge waste.
Of course I find her generosity to be honorable. It's up to her how she wants to direct it.
Maybe she hasn't considered this at all?
Has Bill Gates?
He can give billions away but if he really wants clean water and vaccines to be effective having the US government decimate his efforts both domestically and internationally makes his silence in the last election quite ignorant.
He could buy up media yet he has not. Heck, he could buy up the services that such media rely on.
He could have bought Twitter. He did not.
So his inaction allowed Elon to turn public opinion
He's shorted Tesla stock and made money. He could use that to buy up media or to start a competitor to Twitter and Facebook. Crickets though. Shame.
Zuckerberg does own Facebook yet he's allowed it to become a haven for conspiracy theories and lies. He's weak. I don't see Murdoch allowing others on to lie unless it is the lies he wants told.
Only takes a few determined zealots with an agenda to get others to meekly acquiesce.
How to get millions and even billions to follow along? Way too easy for a populist and his small group of cohorts.
Even when we know better it still happens and is happening now in real time.
Sad.
As are today's ruling class...
Journalist?
How many exist?
Any?
Many delude themselves about some past where there were journalistic standards.
Sure, Fox is propaganda is disguised as a regular "news" show.
Our "journalists" for years have given the American people an illusion of some free press. Such outlets have always been owned by wealthy individuals while if not exactly a Murdoch as an owner were still extremely biased towards their own interests.
I can turn on MSM outlets that for example allow a Lindsey Graham on to lie. Giving false equivalence to lies over actual facts and truth. It has been considered standard journalism for decades if not longer.
When presenting two "sides" and letting the people decide is considered "journalism" there is a problem.
Present facts only.
Accepting "ads" that are lies for money by "networks" or other such news outlets renders any actual reporting meaningless.
These relentless ads shown over and over in easy to digest soundbites are not overcome by some journalist on the same outlet reporting the truth in an hours long format once a year.
Humans don't have the time or the ability to spend on such subjects.
The human mind can't easily discern fact from fiction. Many trust too easily.
They need facts and truth only. In simple terms. Consistently.
It is impossible for most to overcome something they believe to be true that is actually false.
So turn on the news. Do an experiment of MSM.
Weather, sports, celebrity nonsense, car accidents, some limited reporting on foreign affairs, and constant coverage of a known narcissistic lying day and night 24/7. Leaving many scrambling to fact check his lies while also allowing others on to reinforce those lies. Fox is worse but I'm not seeing many journalists. They lack the backbone to stand up to the liars. Cut the mike. Turn off the camera the second they lie. Or don't go at all.
Sure there are a few credible journalists out there that stick to facts only. Yet, our system doesn't allow for the time to ascertain the facts. Reporting news isn't journalism. Reporting what others say isn't journalism. Reporting is about getting views and then selling ads to pay the bills. No viewers, no ads and no money.
So an owner with deep pockets that cares about truth might want to invest in the actual truth. Why?
When has Fascism worked for the wealthy? Never. Short term sure. Long term they always end in disaster.
Is it good to be an oligarch in a country with no rule of law but a dictator? No. That dictator can easily kill a billionaire and disappear them overnight for no reason at all.
Is it good to be a billionaire in a country where you need guards 24/7? Where one fears for their life constantly? Where disease spreads easily? It's quite stressful way to live.
The rich can catch polio and measles.
Bezos is afraid. Zuckerberg is afraid. As are others.
To be that wealthy and afraid of some part time elected employee of the American people can't be considered good by them. Fired once for being a buffoon and now he's trying to outdo his prior incompetence. With the backing of many of the wealthy.
Well they are discovering NOW that he really is not going to help them make money. He cares only about making money for himself. At their expense.
The My Pillow guy never figured it out.
Will they ever?
Dictators don't want competition. Do these billionaires want to risk all they have for the promise of more riches they don't need?
None want to move to Russia. The Kochs might have business there but won't live there.
Elon might want fascism but does he want to live in Russia or China?
Their money isn't their money in those countries. It's only theirs at the whim of the dictator. No real rule of law exists.
It's where we are headed.
They need to wake up or they will lose big time.
Others if they have the means to do so, along with the honor, intelligence, integrity and love of our Constitution need to step up.
More so now than ever.
I believe that the media has never been objective. They either favour the left or the right and as a result are propagandists for their chosen side. CNN is no more objective than FOX, they lie too, just for their side. In Canada we have the CBC who are beholden to the Liberal party because in essence they are supported by the Canadian Government. So they will never bite the hand that feeds them. How can we expect objectivity. Also now we have had generations of people coming up who know nothing about critical thinking and University students who do not know how to be media literate who are turned into activists by their professors. Failures on multiple levels on purpose for those who want to divide and conquer.
Exactly.
I also think that I, Hamilton, like you, meaning journalists who used to rely on the paychecks issued by others and now run our own shops, should tell more writers to just do it. Start the newsletter. Launch the podcast. Begin the YouTube channel. There are fewer barriers to entry than ever before. With good clear writing and an entrepreneurial bent, we don't need to rely on the rich dudes to come in and tell our publications how to report and write and edit stories. We can do that ourselves now.
That's the thing I wish more journalists understood. It reminds me of a Carlos Santana quote: "The biggest cancer on this planet is that not enough people believe in their own light."
I agree with you to a certain extent but building a startup thing into a legit full time job is not a guaranteed prospect for a lot of journalists who need a steady paycheck to survive each month. Ideally we could just have a sustainable industry of union jobs.
More on propaganda, to pass on to those acquaintances who require remedial awareness work.
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2023/06/16/why-propaganda-works/
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2023/05/28/most-propaganda-looks-nothing-like-this
https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-illusory-truth-effect-and-the?utm_source=publication-search
What about propaganda that is simply money or favors between individual government agencies or Congress or government (and contractor) or Supreme Court-based powers and the journalists themselves? What should be done about that? A propaganda law? Punishing whom? A lot of worry about wealthy people who don't really exist when the media has always been owned by wealthy people, not enough concern about the real problem.