• a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    No, they’re not. You’re just willing to undermine the foundations of journalism to get at Trump, which is not conducive to the long-term health of our democracy. Hell , let’s just scrub the first amendment while we’re at it! Then we can throw him in jail for lying! WOOOOO!

    Some things are sacred for a reason. They’re more important than Trump, than this moment in our history. You’re trying to pull a reverse McCarthy where we just lower every bar to get at our enemies. It doesn’t make us as bad as them, but it makes us something new that is also bad. I’m not okay with it, and I’m glad these news agencies are on that same page.

    And really, let’s zoom out for five fucking seconds. “These journalists are all getting played” By fucking what?? By saying “untruth” instead of “lie”, which every person in this country is going to read nigh identically? Really, that’s the big Trump win? Christ alive, yall are so politically weird and ineffective.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      By saying “untruth” instead of “lie”, which every person in this country is going to read nigh identically?

      You got a lotta faith in that huh. Listen, media is not sacred and a “reverse McCarthy” is just McCarthy. (And Roy Cohn, which - nevermind)

      Played how? Played by being told they can’t speak plainly about his constant - constant - lying. His fraudulent nature. His raping. His deep, deep ties to russia and that state’s constant and abiding support of him. They can’t - or won’t - speak plainly, openly, or frequently about these super disqualifying topics because they have a horserace to run. (There’s your sacred journalism - running the horse race.)

      That’s how they’re being played. “Untruth”?? Good fucking god when was the last time you heard or used the word “untruth” in actual human conversation? ? Ever??

      And they’re not even using that in the headlines. They’re using “falsely claimed” - a phrase probably never uttered at all by anyone ever, it’s so contrived.

      You don’t understand that the ‘foundations of journalism’ were undermined in the 80’s. What we have today is a mutated form of advertising, mostly.

      • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        We’ve hit the 24 hour mark and I don’t think this thread is going anywhere productive. I think you and I just have some deeply-held beliefs or ethics that are opposed here. For what it’s worth, we completely agree on who Donald Trump is and the horrific actions he’s taken over his lifetime. The lies, the fraud, the assaults, all of it. I do get frustrated that more people don’t see that, but where we split is what we’re willing to see society do to solve it. There’s a lot of complexity there and I don’t deny that there would be benefits to your more hardline approach. I just think it would have irreversible, terrible consequences for our media landscape, and subsequently the entire American constituency, after Trump is gone.

        It’s unfortunate that we weren’t able to find common ground, but I respect your convictions, genuinely.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Fwiw it sounds like we did, in fact, find common ground. If we survive the weak, ineffective, republiQan-tilting media coverage of the election and somehow defeat the looming obvious destruction of all ethics and democracy, we’ll pick up again on how journalists can have a more authentic, less ‘corporatized’ voice. It’s a good discussion.