Yeah, it really bothers me. Especially stuff like the DailyBeast and MidasTouch. They’re just so clickbaity and editorialized, hyperbolizing and spinning and just in general not being good journalism.
Like, there are so many factual and accurate ways to criticize the current administration. Let’s just stick to the facts and avoid reactionary sensationalism, because that just discredits all the legitimate critique. It’s a lot harder to argue with someone when they’re used to hearing that kind of bullshit and tuning out anything that sounds remotely similar.
And then whenever I call out bad journalism, disinformation, logical fallacies, or other bad-faith arguments, people attack me as if I’m attacking the position itself and not the presentation of it. I might support socialism, but if someone frames it in a way that does more harm than good I can critique their framing of it without disagreeing with the overall conclusion.
But a lot of people really seem to lack that nuance. It makes it really hard to have an intelligent discussion without being flooded with strawman arguments in response, arguing against points that I didn’t make.
I guess it’s the price we all pay for getting our news for free. And I don’t say that lightly.
But a lot of people really seem to lack that nuance.
Yeah I feel you. But hasn’t that always been the case with people?
As far as politics go it’s always going to be worse in a 2-party system, though. Around here, most people are used to having different-but-not-completely-different opinions. But many hunger for American-style gamified politics regardless. Once again, I blame Big social media and its algorithms.
Yeah, it really bothers me. Especially stuff like the DailyBeast and MidasTouch. They’re just so clickbaity and editorialized, hyperbolizing and spinning and just in general not being good journalism.
Like, there are so many factual and accurate ways to criticize the current administration. Let’s just stick to the facts and avoid reactionary sensationalism, because that just discredits all the legitimate critique. It’s a lot harder to argue with someone when they’re used to hearing that kind of bullshit and tuning out anything that sounds remotely similar.
And then whenever I call out bad journalism, disinformation, logical fallacies, or other bad-faith arguments, people attack me as if I’m attacking the position itself and not the presentation of it. I might support socialism, but if someone frames it in a way that does more harm than good I can critique their framing of it without disagreeing with the overall conclusion.
But a lot of people really seem to lack that nuance. It makes it really hard to have an intelligent discussion without being flooded with strawman arguments in response, arguing against points that I didn’t make.
I guess it’s the price we all pay for getting our news for free. And I don’t say that lightly.
Yeah I feel you. But hasn’t that always been the case with people?
As far as politics go it’s always going to be worse in a 2-party system, though. Around here, most people are used to having different-but-not-completely-different opinions. But many hunger for American-style gamified politics regardless. Once again, I blame Big social media and its algorithms.
No it’s not, the Associated Press is free news and they’re reputable journalists who value journalistic integrity. They’re not the only ones, either.