Alternative title: The thirstiest auto-fellatio you'll read all year
The author is Louis Menand, a highly educated boomer liberal, a writer, an award winning journ*list who reported on the Cold War.
Indeed, he's seen it all. There's hardly anyone better positioned to write this article. There's hardly anyone left with the breadth and depth of his professional experience.
So why have people lost faith in journ*lism? Perhaps he'll write on the changing approach to journ*lism of the younger professionals. Perhaps he'll write on the thinly veiled activism often disguised as journ*lism. Perhaps he'll talk about cancel culture and social media and how this new invention has parasitized journ*lism.
But unfortunately for you, like many in his category, Drumpf completely and utterly broke him.
Obligatory Drumpf is literally Hitler article.
Let's see what he instead blames for the Inversion of the Trust Thermocline:
Number one: Drumpf of course no question about this.
Julian Assange. Was anything Wikileaks spread false? Who cares, he hurt Democrats and that's criminal.
The First Amendment is problematic.
Too many white men and lack of women and minorities.
The CIA is also responsible for mistrust in journ*lism
Richard Nixon campaigning against journ*lists? I mean frick it right, btw 1960s trust in the media was close to an all time high.
The plebians are just too dumb to understand.
Last but not least, journ*lists are too objective, they SHOULD have an agenda.
Yes I'm being flippant with some of these points, but Louis our dear friend legitimately and unironically made those last two point, straight up.
Thanks Drumpf, we're never going to trustworthy news, are we?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's funny that he would jump to trump because he's one president too late.
Obama broke the media. They were so thrilled to have a smooth talking basketball as president, they decided he could do no wrong. Remember when they went to bat for him on the claim that he had a scandal free presidency? Completely absurd. They destroyed their own credibility during those eight years making the clear decision to abandon objectivity and become state propaganda. Orange man simply called them on it.
Journ*lists do have an agenda. Obviously, now more than ever. And, just as obviously, that agenda makes them untrustworthy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I think seeing the coverage on Obama as a teenager was the first time I started to
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
The Onion broke during Obama. Instead of poking fun at the president, their favorite angle became "We don't deserve him!"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Same goes for the daily show and the like tbh. You can effectively chart the quality of a country’s chattering class by the quality of it’s satirists. I blame millenials starting to fill media positions during the Obummer presidency.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
decline basically started in 2003/5 for dems, for reps/ind it was earlier
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That 70 percent is bleak
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I think (hope) part of that percentage is libtards just saying they trust journos to signal themselves as on the right side of history(tm). But tbqh I’m not sure if that’s better or worse.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Absolute bullshit. Leftoid journos only know how to b-word and whine about whoever is in power and praise weaklings and victims. Did you ever see Rachel Maddow around 2008-2009? Literally every night she would whine about how he hadn't done anything for gays in the military yet. It was like Ted Koppel in 1979 counting the days since the hostages had been taken in Iran. Then there was the "drone strikes", a total bullshit non-issue that the left went into a rage about. Leftoids are utterly incapable of winning because as soon as one of them is succeeding, the rest just tear him down.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm not talking about the ultra partisan talking heads like Maddow who are discontent for a living. I'm thinking more mainstream press, such as the following
David Brooks of the New York Times (“The Obama administration has been remarkably scandal-free”),
USA Today (“Obama has been a largely classy, mature and personally scandal-free presence in the White House”)
Paul Waldman in the Week (“Barack Obama will be president for less than eight more months, and he’s had only piddling little scandalettes.”)
Even the Wapo "fact check" that I pulled these from concludes:
This is obviously ridiculous, and anyone with a functioning frontal cortex during the obama years knows that it's ridiculous. Forget about what happened during his presidency, at the end it was his justice department lying to the fisa courts to manipulate the FBI into spying on his political opponent, arguably the most outrageous scandal in modern us history that has been mostly ignored by a media who spent the entirety of the trump presidency chasing their tails over nothingburger russiagate.
The distrust in the media is largely an own goal.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I AM A GROWN MAN WITH GROWN KIDS AINT NOBODY TELL ME WHEN TO TALK
I am not Darrell Brooks, I am a third party intervener, here on behalf of my client
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
No, don't reply like this, please do another wall of unhinged rant please.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context