Legacy media continue to die.
Saturday, October 22, 2016
5 comments:
READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING!
All comments are subject to approval before they are published, so they will not appear immediately. Comments should be civil, relevant, and substantive. Anonymous comments are not allowed and will be unceremoniously deleted. For more on my comments policy, please see this entry on my other blog.
AND A NEW RULE (per this post): comments critical of Trump's lying must include criticism of Biden's or Kamala's or some prominent leftie's lying on a one-for-one basis! Failure to be balanced means your comment will not be published.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fair enough, although I cut my teeth in both newspaper and magazine publishing. I admit to a little sorrow.
ReplyDeleteIn the near future, dead-tree media will have ceased to exist and online journalists will report the news using nothing but emoticons and GIFs. The few remaining old-school holdouts who insist on using complete, complex sentences will be denounced by the social-media hordes for the thoughtcrime of "syntactic privilege," which discriminates against anyone with a sub-genius IQ, and banished to Antarctica for the remainder of their sorry-ass lives.
ReplyDeleteI think a little elaboration is in order here. Why "good riddance"?
ReplyDeleteCharles,
ReplyDeleteThere
are
many
reasons.
Or maybe they're all just one reason.
Or maybe I've just seen too many Styxhexenhammer666 videos.
To be clear, the term "legacy media" includes a rightie outlet like Fox. Fox, like the other legacy establishments, tries to pass itself off as "fair and balanced" when it so obviously isn't. It's all propaganda at this point, what with the mainstream media largely covering for Hillary Clinton as they are.* My problem isn't necessarily with the bias; it's more a disgust at the pretense of unbiased coverage. If the legacy media were to drop the mask and simply announce their agendas, I wouldn't wish so hard for them all to die. The alternative is to tolerate the current situation, in which we all know everyone is biased, but the media, pro forma, deny this. I think that that denial has a pernicious effect on public discourse because it adds a layer of deceit to it.**
I'm not saying the new media represent a clearly healthy alternative, but at least the vloggers on YouTube and the folks at their small websites make no bones about where they stand.
__________
*True, Hillary's reflexive tendency to be secretive sometimes means she worries about what the normally friendly media might find out about her.
**Another alternative would be for all media to clean house and become as fair and objective as possible. But I don't see that happening. Ever. Glenn Reynolds wryly notes that media bias is a good reason to vote for Trump: President Hillary's gaffes and shenanigans will be suppressed and/or excused by the fawning news outlets, but President Trump will be forced into transparency by media that will relentlessly hold his feet to the fire.
Thanks for the clarification. I don't agree with everything there, but I do see where you're coming from.
ReplyDelete