Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I can see exactly why people would perceive it as preening. To an extent, it is, because it necessarily includes the argument, "You're being manipulated." People find that assertion a bit insulting.
But I think if you read that book, which is highly entertaining in terms of style alone, you'll see that he's not engaging in mere both-sidesism. He's careful to assert that the right has less interest in facts, and is more cynical. But he also notes that the left is starting to follow suit, and starting to catch up with the right in that regard.
His best critique is the one I cited - the swarm-of-screamers-on-speed mentality of modern media - which is more the fault of social media than anything else. As part of that, he argues news should never be a business. It's a public service element of traditional media. And it's becoming a business has turned it into a pusher. It can't let you off the hook for a second to formulate your own views, or to think "This isn't all that important." It feeds you constantly repackaged information designed to trigger anger or delight and get you locked into the next dopamine hit, or cortisol-and-adrenaline-fueled rage.
Both sides may not be equally dishonest in the content they push, but both equally seek to monopolize your eyeballs regardless of damage to your mental health and the social fabric of the country.
It's not his most organized and coherent book (The Divide is), but it's probably his most important. There are stretches of text where he dismantles the modern media business so well you wonder how he ever gets airtime anymore.
|
I admire your ability to throw some Both sidesism into an exchange where we weren't even talking about political parties. Well done!
My point was that he paints with too broad a brush. So you slopped on some more paint. Don't mind the windows or the molding -- just throw that paint on everywhere.
My point about the preening is that you are doing what you would call virtue-signaling, dumping on the media generally (and both sides!) to signal your own superiority. They may be manipulating both sides, but you are certainly above that. (When is it time to do horserace journalism again?)
As you would know if you ever read my posts on the subject, I have plenty of issues with the media. But you (and Taibbi, if he has the nuance you attribute to him) are not interested in distinguishing better from worse in the media -- you're dumping on everyone to say that you're above it all.
Threaded Mode