Printable View
It's an editorial rather than just an "article", and is just as guilty of ignoring subtleties in stories as the media it accuses of doing the same. It's too bad that the editors take the germs of a real issue and infect it with their own bias.Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterofreality
I think the security token issue is they don’t want you doing a copy and paste! [emoji16]Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterofreality
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjf123
“The year 2021 that ends this week wasn’t the re*turn to nor*malcy that Pres*i*dent Biden promised, but it was in*valu*able in one re*spect. This was the year when the con*formity that char*ac*ter*izes Amer*i*can pol*i*tics and me*dia was ex*posed for its mis*takes as never be*fore.“
Ok. So that posted. I’ll do it in sections.
By con*formity we mean the pro*gres*sive po*lit*i*cal and me*dia con*sen*sus that forms quickly around an is*sue and then re*in*forces it*self no mat*ter the com*pet*ing ar*gu*ments or new in*for*ma*tion. This isn’t a con*spir*acy in any for*mal sense; there are no or*ga*nized calls or Zoom meet*ings.
“
This is about a shared set of po*lit*i*cal val*ues and pref*er*ences that leads peo*ple to reach the same con*clu*sions about an event. The re*porters and com*men*ta*tors of the ma*jor pro*gres*sive me*dia—the Wash*ing*ton Post, Bloomberg, the Fi*nan*cial Times, the New York Times, the At*lantic, and more—all then re*in*force what they now like to call the “nar*ra*tive” of a story.
Politi*cians and the press feed the nar*ra*tive with leaks and the sto*ries they pur*sue—or, as im*por*tant, what they don’t pur*sue. Dis*agree*ment is rare to nonex*is*tent be*cause the cost can be os*tracism or lost ca*reers.”
Re*call how James Ben*net lost his job as New York Times opin*ion ed*i*tor for run*ning an op-ed by GOP Sen. Tom Cot*ton on us*ing the mil*i*tary to con*trol ur*ban ri*ots. Mr. Ben*net thought he was merely ex*pos*ing read*ers to a dif*fer*ent point of view. He was ban*ished for chal*leng*ing the pro*gres*sive nar*ra*tive af*ter George Floyd’s mur*der.
Only when it is ex*posed over time as false does the con*formity break, and typ*i*cally only if there are neg*a*tive po*lit*i*cal con*se*quences for De*moc*rats. The sav*ing grace is that some*times re*al*ity is im*pos*si*ble to ig*nore, and 2021 was the year this hap*pened on some of the big*gest events of our time. It’s worth re*count*ing a few ex*am*ples to see how the dom*i*nant con*sen*sus was wrong about so much for so long.
• The Wuhan Vi*rol*ogy Lab ori*gin the*ory of Covid-19. In the early days of the pan*demic, even rais*ing this as a pos*si*bil*ity was taboo. Sen. Cot*ton was vil*i*fied for do*ing so. The Lancet, a sup*pos*edly open-minded sci*en*tific jour*nal, pub*lished a let*ter in Feb*ruary 2020 “to strongly con*demn con*spir*acy the*o*ries sug*gest*ing that COVID-19 does not have a nat*ural ori*gin.”
This year we learned that the Lancet let*ter was part of a co*or*di*nated ef*fort to quash the lab the*ory. We learned about the con*flicts of in*ter*est of An*thony Fauci and oth*ers who pro*vided fund*ing for the Wuhan lab. Even*tu*ally even the press no*ticed that China had blocked an hon*est in*quiry, and that no ev*i*dence for a nat*ural ori*gin has emerged.
• Lock*downs stop Covid-19. There was no fiercer con*sen*sus in the early days of the virus than the be*lief that lock*ing down the econ*omy to stop the virus was an unadul*ter*ated so*cial good. We felt the con*sen*sus wrath when we raised doubts, in an ed*i*to*r*ial on March 20, 2020, about the harm that lock*downs would do to the econ*omy and pub*lic health.
Two years later we now know that lock*downs at most de*lay the virus spread. The dam*age in lost ed*u*ca*tion for chil*dren, lost liveli*hoods for work*ers and em*ploy*ers, and dam*age to men*tal health is ob*vi*ous for all to see. Even Randi Wein*garten, the teach*ers union chief who did so much to keep schools closed, now claims she wanted to keep them open all along.
• The sup*ply side of the econ*omy doesn’t mat*ter. The Key*ne*sian con*sen*sus, which dom*i*nates the U.S. and Eu*ropean me*dia, has long held that the de*mand for goods and ser*vices dri*ves the econ*omy. The abil*ity or in*cen*tive to sup*ply those goods is largely ig*nored or dis*missed. Spurring de*mand was the the*ory be*hind the tril*lions of dol*lars in spend*ing by Con*gress and easy money from the Fed*eral Re*serve.
All that money did spur de*mand. But the Key*ne*sians ig*nored the dis*in*cen*tives to in*crease sup*ply from pay*ing peo*ple not to work and re*strict*ing work with lock*downs and man*dates. The re*sult was the surg*ing in*fla*tion that caught nearly all of them by sur*prise. Their de*mand-side mod*els never saw it com*ing.
• The Steele dossier and Rus*sia col*lu*sion nar*ra*tive. In 2019 the Mueller re*port ex*posed the lack of ev*i*dence for the claims that Don*ald Trump and the Krem*lin were in ca*hoots. This year the in*dict*ments by spe*cial coun*sel John Durham have re*vealed how De*moc*rats and the press worked to*gether to pro*mote the dossier that was based on dis*in*for*ma*tion.
Yet for four years nearly every*one in the dom*i*nant me*dia bought the col*lu*sion nar*ra*tive. One or two of the gullible have apol*o*gized, but most want every*one to for*get what they wrote or said at the time.