It's been six years since Steve Bannon's advisory on how to neutralize journalists: "Flood the zone with shit."
Learning what that means, how it works, is now basic to newsroom competence.
Six years! Which is to say, things like this this should not be happening.
“The mainstream media leans Republican. ‘Mainstream’ includes WSJ, USA Today, WaPo, NYT, FOX News, CNN, MSNBC, every Radio and satellite station…and if you tally it all, you’ll find that it’s heavily Republican.”
I’ve been saying that for at least 8 years.
I get to laugh at those who ridiculed me.
The New York Times is a fucking right-wing newspaper, and they’re doing all of this on purpose.
The sooner people realize this on move the fuck on from it, the better.
Recall they just chase stats. As soc media drives the engagements up with complex fake traffic, trad media simply hips on the bandwagon for $. The test headlines constantly and tweak to move the winners ($) up. Focus anger on that system. Regulate it.
It's equally absurd given that 1. Trump has encouraged attacks on journalists by his faithful and 2. They absolutely do have writers putting out necessary news and it's buried several pages in: bsky.app/profile/meli...
"Learning what that means, how it works, is now basic to newsroom competence." I half-disagree - I think that being susceptible to this strategy is *fundamental* to the access-based stenographic journalism that dominates nowadays. Only actual investigative journalism can be resistant towards it.
New York Times is not on the side of democracy. It is not on the side of objective news reporting. It is on the side of sensationalism, because that's what sells newspapers. It's not much better than the New York Post.
After this long I'm forced to conclude that the strongest forces in mainstream journalism want and welcome the shit, don't care about being neutralized
I'm disgusted by the gaslighting & propaganda maneuvers of the right.They act like 7 years old on a playground. I want adults in government office;people who do their job, who understand they serve the people that elected them, not the mega-corporations that paid for their campaign. No billionaires!
I think we’re beyond “flood the zone” neutralization and into more active use of prestige media’s “balance” as leverage against democratic institutions
Effort: RW messaging
Load: institutions
Pivot: NYT
(NYT: Because we are not moved, we are doing our job well)
But isn't this, in a way, exactly the reversal we were hoping for? Biden finally calling a Nazi a Nazi, and the Nazi left babbling "he only wants to confuse you, let's talk about something boring instead"?
No. It isn’t incompetence. @nytimes.com is deliberately trying to get Trump elected. This goes through multiple reviews and editors. It’s all intentional.
They've learned nothing. What-aboutism and both-sideism are rampant. As is daily horse-race story. If anything has changed it's been in keeping with Bannon's prescription; DJT's most outlandish, violent, and dishonesty go unchallenged and indeed little remarked. www.vanityfair.com/news/donald-...
Help us understand why it does. As a former journalist, I am floored. My experience was we had a huge wall from the business side but it feels like profit motive or power/access motive. It is pure corruption to avoid including basic context. The press should serve readers not the powerful.
AG Sulzberger is the worst publisher of The New York Times my 63 years as a potential reader. Everything he knows about news dissemination, he’s learned from Republicans, beginning with “The Contract With America.” He’s as dangerous as Trump.