Since I am a paid subscriber to all three: Persuasion, The Free Press and the NYT, I am a somewhat believable critic. In one word: "OH MY &*^%,7%!!! God!" It hurts to read the NYT! And I do every single morning. They are some of the most smarmy self-convinced maliciously sarcastic meanies I have ever read. And if Trump wins I fully blame them. Thank you for letting me say this in a safe place.
"Lawrence Rosenthal, chair of the Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies"
I thought: NFW does this exist! So I looked it up: Rosenthal is Chair of the "Institute of Societal Studies" and editor of the "Journal for Right Wing Studies."
They claim: "The Center and JRWS are nonideological and seek to promote research, dialogue, and debate on all aspects of right-wing politics, past and present, in the West and around the globe."
but if you look a little further, you find this:
"Perhaps not since the 1930s and 1940s have concerned citizens been so acutely aware of the threats facing liberal democracy. "
And of course, every article is written by a lefty, who either approaches viewpoints to the right of them through a patronizing pith-helmet "studying the primates" lens or with a "this is Weimar Germany and it's time to panic because the Nazis are nearly upon us" screed.
I subscribed to the NYT for decades but find it completely captured by ideology and not worth reading (though I still have a games subscription). It’s gone the way of NPR, another casualty of extreme liberal bias. I no longer read or listen to either and I know I’m not alone.
In 1917 there were a great number of Russians that were saying the same thing.
“People want their biases confirmed. They want to be cocooned in feedback that they were always right.“
This is what Haidt points out in his book “The Righteous Mind”, but it isn’t all people… it is people weak of character… people with narcissist traits… people lacking a true sense of self and the self-confidence that derives from it. Many of these people own the common dark triad personality traits.
I have a theory that there is a spectrum where at the top are people with abundant self confidence that allows them to not only admit when they are wrong, but they constantly seek out opinions and information to learn and improve. They are open to having their mind changed, but based on real logic, facts and information. At the bottom are more emotionally and intellectually fragile people. These people are terrified of being wrong. And so they don’t make decisions easily. They stay in school longer because of their fear of failure. They get their education credentials and it becomes a replacement/placebo for their missing core. They will simply demand they are right because they have a degree… while they mount a growing list of errors and mistakes as they are still prone to emotional decision-making that is suboptimal. Their inventory of mistakes makes them more desperate to gain control and silence their critics because they are still wired to fear having to admit they are wrong more than they fear death.
They are really the people that are emotionally and psychologically off… in need of some level of cognitive behavior therapy. And they for some reason have flocked to journalism as their career.
"fresh ideas from academia that began to reshape every part of society."
That certainly didn't begin in 2020. That is only when it crescendoed. I started being appalled by what I was reading certain places in 2008 or so, and I was a totally normie blue tribe liberal. It really started to dominate after 2012 or so.
"Todd and I chat. He tells me that I need to more fully emphasize the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) “Hatewatch’s” assessment of PragerU."
So did the piece ever give PragerU the opportunity to respond to SPLC's assessment? I know you can't ask for comment on every single thing, but if you're going to emphasize some other (known partisan) group's assessment, it seems like they target should be afforded space to respond.
I recently had a screaming fight with a group of people who are a touch more conservative than I am. I based my entire argument on material I read in The New York Times. Several days later, more correct information was published elsewhere. I am so ashamed of myself.
Journalists, like academics, became activists. The betrayal of a core identity. Nellie Bowles captures the excitement this generated among groups, even highly educated ones. That energy is where human beings take a wrong turn, just as in Germany in the 1930’s.
Since I am a paid subscriber to all three: Persuasion, The Free Press and the NYT, I am a somewhat believable critic. In one word: "OH MY &*^%,7%!!! God!" It hurts to read the NYT! And I do every single morning. They are some of the most smarmy self-convinced maliciously sarcastic meanies I have ever read. And if Trump wins I fully blame them. Thank you for letting me say this in a safe place.
The term “crybullies” has been coined.
"Lawrence Rosenthal, chair of the Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies"
I thought: NFW does this exist! So I looked it up: Rosenthal is Chair of the "Institute of Societal Studies" and editor of the "Journal for Right Wing Studies."
They claim: "The Center and JRWS are nonideological and seek to promote research, dialogue, and debate on all aspects of right-wing politics, past and present, in the West and around the globe."
but if you look a little further, you find this:
"Perhaps not since the 1930s and 1940s have concerned citizens been so acutely aware of the threats facing liberal democracy. "
And of course, every article is written by a lefty, who either approaches viewpoints to the right of them through a patronizing pith-helmet "studying the primates" lens or with a "this is Weimar Germany and it's time to panic because the Nazis are nearly upon us" screed.
Yeah right, this journal is "non-ideological."
Yeah that is absolute lunacy. The pretense is so paper thin it is hilarious.
I subscribed to the NYT for decades but find it completely captured by ideology and not worth reading (though I still have a games subscription). It’s gone the way of NPR, another casualty of extreme liberal bias. I no longer read or listen to either and I know I’m not alone.
“It was a heady, beautiful philosophy.”
In 1917 there were a great number of Russians that were saying the same thing.
“People want their biases confirmed. They want to be cocooned in feedback that they were always right.“
This is what Haidt points out in his book “The Righteous Mind”, but it isn’t all people… it is people weak of character… people with narcissist traits… people lacking a true sense of self and the self-confidence that derives from it. Many of these people own the common dark triad personality traits.
I have a theory that there is a spectrum where at the top are people with abundant self confidence that allows them to not only admit when they are wrong, but they constantly seek out opinions and information to learn and improve. They are open to having their mind changed, but based on real logic, facts and information. At the bottom are more emotionally and intellectually fragile people. These people are terrified of being wrong. And so they don’t make decisions easily. They stay in school longer because of their fear of failure. They get their education credentials and it becomes a replacement/placebo for their missing core. They will simply demand they are right because they have a degree… while they mount a growing list of errors and mistakes as they are still prone to emotional decision-making that is suboptimal. Their inventory of mistakes makes them more desperate to gain control and silence their critics because they are still wired to fear having to admit they are wrong more than they fear death.
They are really the people that are emotionally and psychologically off… in need of some level of cognitive behavior therapy. And they for some reason have flocked to journalism as their career.
"fresh ideas from academia that began to reshape every part of society."
That certainly didn't begin in 2020. That is only when it crescendoed. I started being appalled by what I was reading certain places in 2008 or so, and I was a totally normie blue tribe liberal. It really started to dominate after 2012 or so.
"Todd and I chat. He tells me that I need to more fully emphasize the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) “Hatewatch’s” assessment of PragerU."
So did the piece ever give PragerU the opportunity to respond to SPLC's assessment? I know you can't ask for comment on every single thing, but if you're going to emphasize some other (known partisan) group's assessment, it seems like they target should be afforded space to respond.
I recently had a screaming fight with a group of people who are a touch more conservative than I am. I based my entire argument on material I read in The New York Times. Several days later, more correct information was published elsewhere. I am so ashamed of myself.
Journalists, like academics, became activists. The betrayal of a core identity. Nellie Bowles captures the excitement this generated among groups, even highly educated ones. That energy is where human beings take a wrong turn, just as in Germany in the 1930’s.
Will there be a ‘reckoning’ for the reckoners?