251
Well yeah, they’ve been shilling for the other team and now she has the gall to ignore them for people who are more relevant?
And politicos readership isn’t who need energizing and convincing. The people who aren’t voting and aren’t paying attention are the ones she needs to find.
Any political analyst with half a brain could figure that out. Especially with the election this close and the electoral college the way it is.
Well, turnabout is fair play, because the complete and total lack of integrity, and visibly naked profit drive in terms of how they conduct themselves and inform the public discourse these days, has pissed me off for well over a decade.
Sanewashing Trump while seeking to nitpick every tiny detail of Harris's platform to death is the exact same "both sides" bullshit from 2016. What's different this time around is no one buys these outlets as some kind of Fourth Estate above it all. They're looking for a gotcha answer, so they can put up a clickbait title attacking Harris and generate more clicks.
Harris is not playing by their rules. Good for her.
no one buys these outlets as some kind of Fourth Estate above it all
The actual journalist organizations out there are few and far-between.
Your statement above is doubly apt. Murdoch wasn't buying them as some kind of 4th estate either ;-)
More like a fifth column.
Legacy media wants to be the kingmakers, aka "you cannot deliver your message without us, we have to shape the narrative". She's communicating directly to her voters and it's pissing them off. And then, whenever they get a chance to ask her something it's always some inane shit like "why do you think Trump says you're not black" and not a single actual policy question.
Or they'll do shit like put Harris on full blast for not providing "detailed policies," and then moving the goalposts to "but how do you pay for it" when she does, and nitpicking every word of every sentence she says. Meanwhile, Trump will cancel interviews, go up on stage at rally, spew a word salad response, and the NYT will bend over backwards to reword the salad to make him look better, while casting his decision to dodge a second debate as "smart" and avoiding any form of scrutiny as "efficient use of campaign funds." At best, they'll halfheartedly throw in a fact check like "his plan to fix inflation by levying tariffs will increase inflation" but they don't dare portray him as the senile, hate-filled lunatic he is because they're terrified of angering their right wing audience (who are already shifting away from legacy media anyway to reinforce their bubble). They also do this because virtually all forms of legacy media have been coopted by the billionaire sociopaths that would very much like a second Trump term to give them another tax cut and the "freedom" to pollute our world and grind the heel of their boot into the face of the working class so that they can race to become the first trillionaire.
Youth vote isn't looking at politico or the legacy media.
These dudes fart into jars so they can smell their farts, I bet.
oh god I bet thats true wow god imagine it
Legacy media seems to be about as bad in faith as the Republicans are, they are just better at hiding it. But giving any legitimacy at all to Trump has shown their true colours.
The big ones are pretty much all right wing media, some of them are just targeted at people who find a rant about hierarchies of race, gender, or sexually to be in bad taste.
Yep.
Look at how legacy media is covering today. Kamala went on 60 minutes. What are they reporting on? Trump's reaction to it and what conservatives think.
I heard the term "sane-washing" in the context of news only posting interpretations of what Trump is trying to say.
“We don’t know her well enough”. Sounds like she’s trying to satisfy their request?
Legacy media sucks pretty much. They keep sucking off Republicans and asking Harris non questions that no one gives a shit about. They talk about wanting to press her on issues but then they don't do that at all. Their idea of pressing her on an issue is asking her about dumb shit like her race or some statement she made back in the past that's already clearly explained. Meanwhile when they interview Republicans it's all hwarts and rainbows and normalization.
Fuck em
Listening to the NPR Up First podcast, they mentioned that Kamala is going on podcasts. They did point out that the podcast hosts don't have journalistic training.
Kind of disappointing, but understandable coming from people who went to school for journalism.
Harris knows that swing voters are not listening to NPR. They’re listening to the stuff at the top of Spotify and Apple’s podcast lists.
Trump also knows this, and he’s been doing it longer than Harris has been.
On the other hand, the current political press acts like it has never even read the dictionary definition of journalism let alone had journalistic training these days.
Doesn't really matter though, none of the big news agencies have any journalistic integrity anyway. If everyone's just gonna make up bullshit to get ad revenue, the only thing that really matters to a politician is what audiences does a content creator give them access to.
Reminds me that Obama was on Between Two Ferns over ten years ago. Granted, it was not during his election, but that one stands out as particularly silly. Plenty do late night TV, though, and Conan might have been my first exposure to Obama when he was a relative no-name in Chicago.
Those types of things really humanize politicians. I feel like that was lacking with Biden (although I think Hillary tried because there wasn't much to humanize). I'm glad Harris is doing a good job taking the more interesting outlets. What next, Hot Ones?
Great idea, surviving "da Bomb" could improve her street cred considerably.
I mean, we jest but she'd probably rock that, growing up with indian food and all. Lol
I hope it works.
Really good article, thanks for posting.
this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
251 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3355 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS