There are a lot of good liberal, progressive, and left-of-center policy- and research centers out on the web today (one of the best is the Center for Media and Democracy). It's a far cry from how it was 10 years ago. There are also great discussion forums like Daily Kos and MyDD that continue to offer debate on issues of the day.
And I'm all for having opinions that differ, existing in these environments. I think it's very important that differing viewpoints (be they liberal, conservative, or otherwise) be evaluated and the most logical, reasonable, intelligent, and forward-thinking ideas should prevail in any kind of debate.
I find such things don't really exist within most Conservative counterparts. I find they also largely don't exist in most mainstream media (hence the existance of Media Matters). There are no real debates - just lots of talking points and trolling. Of course talking points are all one has when one doesn't have any real arguments.
But real discussion of issues isn't very appealing to do where there isn't any real debate, like most conservative outlets. So often such viewpoints and trolls end up in more non-conservative sites. I find that's done to really poison the public debate going on elsewhere, or to really derail debate altogether.
But right-wingers also know that's not the only way to derail public debate. They have their own pretend mediums - like cable news.
But contrary to what many may think - I don't believe Faux News is the propoganda arm of the Republican Party. Their audience consists of conservatives, right-wingers, libertarians, and various other groups and such, so they appeal to them. In a sense, they are entertaining their audience, in order to sell their sponsors' products. This should come as no surprise in that Faux News is owned by a large entertainment media congomerate.
(Hey, by that argument, aren't pretty much all major networks owned by large entertainment conglomerates?)
By the same argument, I don't consider Rush Limbaugh the de-facto head of any political party. He's an entertainer, his audience is mostly conservative and right-wing. He's saying whatever sells his sponsors's products the most to his audience.
'The Politco' is a different story.
"Thrush was handed a truncated quote that came bundled with an official statement from the NRCC, which Thrush included in his original report. There should have been a moment, prior to publication, where Thrush questioned the neatly wrapped gift he received from this party operative."
Indeed. A real journalist would've questioned what was given and verified the data was accurate.
Hence 'The Politico' is not - and never was - journalism. Unlike Faux and Rush, I consider them a publisher of the American Republican Party spin. Their entire existence came about from various right-wing sources - read Glenn Greenwald's Politico origins.
(Check this out for a more recent Politco takedown - courtesy Mr. Greenwald).
Any person or persons using Politco as a source of anything is diluting their own credibility in a debate, or otherwise.
No comments:
Post a Comment