981
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
981 points (99.1% liked)
politics
31086 readers
1770 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm glad this happens in a world where newspapers endorse candidates, but I also don't get why newspapers are allowed to endorse candidates in the first place. I guess that is the least of our concerns when you look at media bias, but still....
Newspapers are allowed to endorse candidates because the first amendment protects free speech. While I may agree with you that endorsements and news media stumping for ANY candidate is problematic and reeks of propaganda, it is, for better or worse, protected by the constitution.
Indeed, it's a shame that companies are considered people.
For anyone seeing this, there is a great documentary from decades ago called "The Corporation". It's extremely prescient at all times, but especially now.
https://youtu.be/6v8e7dUwq_Q
Think of it in terms of "out in the open". Fwiw most (all) media orgs have a bias and as such are more likely to endorse a certain candidate. That could be President, it could be mayor. Would you rather have that endorsement in the open or hidden in context?
I'd rather have neutral, fact based reporting. That one party endorses “alternative facts” was a choice by that party. It doesn't mean that people more grounded in reality are biased.
In other words: if you are an US-American news source that reports neutrally, the vast majority of your staff will be voting Democrats.
You ain't wrong. That's what makes this world increasingly fucked up.
What's that saying? "The truth tends to have a natural bias to the left" or some shit like that.
I mean when the choice is either facism or democracy, I'd assume being unbiased is a little hard. After all, the nazis did attack the press first to instill propaganda.
Because I don’t follow the ins and outs of local news or local politics. If the journalists following the school board controversies on a daily basis have a better opinion on who should be on the school board or county judge role, I will trust them.
Freedom of speech