Media called Youngkin moderate. Our political media is conservative-biased

[Anonymous]

Our media has a broad pro-Republican bias.

They called Youngkin a moderate.

Why did the media do that?
Well, first, the media that covered Youngkin is part of massive corporations – AT&T owns CNN, Comcast owns MSNBC – and the execs are generally Republicans because tax cuts help corporations even as they hurt workers.

And second, US media has decided they have to be neutral. (This isn't true for media in other countries.)
And the obvious way to exploit neutral media is to lie. Then they cover one sides' lies as equal to the other sides' truthfulness.


So Republicans like Youngkin lie.
And our media covers it as if it's true.

NYT Politics and NYT Opinion is effectively conservative in practice (yes Republican posters, I know your minds are blown, but just use your brains a little bit - everything said here is true, you must admit.).
The most popular parts of NYT are therefore conservative-biased, because they try to cover both sides equally, and one side – Glenn Youngkin's side – is a bunch of liars.

A truly liberal media would be saying the truth, at minimum: that Youngkin is an extremist.

But we have a conservative media. In practice if not in self-regard.

[Anonymous]

Youngkin got elected with the complicity of NYT Politics, WaPo Politics, and CNN Politics.



Just think about it. Anyone who was paying attention clearly could predict Youngkin would do all these radical extrmist executive orders on being inaugurated.

And these actions are widely toxic to moderate voters.

But MODERATE VOTERS DID NOT KNOW that Youngkin would do this extreme stuff. Because NYT and WaPo and CNN didn't tell them.

That's a big big problem for our democracy.

Youngkin is only in office because US political media is a smoking dumpster fire of Republican lie amplification.

And people who work at those political desks don't realize they're failing our country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our media has a broad pro-Republican bias.

They called Youngkin a moderate.

Why did the media do that?
Well, first, the media that covered Youngkin is part of massive corporations – AT&T owns CNN, Comcast owns MSNBC – and the execs are generally Republicans because tax cuts help corporations even as they hurt workers.

And second, US media has decided they have to be neutral. (This isn't true for media in other countries.)
And the obvious way to exploit neutral media is to lie. Then they cover one sides' lies as equal to the other sides' truthfulness.


So Republicans like Youngkin lie.
And our media covers it as if it's true.

NYT Politics and NYT Opinion is effectively conservative in practice (yes Republican posters, I know your minds are blown, but just use your brains a little bit - everything said here is true, you must admit.).
The most popular parts of NYT are therefore conservative-biased, because they try to cover both sides equally, and one side – Glenn Youngkin's side – is a bunch of liars.

A truly liberal media would be saying the truth, at minimum: that Youngkin is an extremist.

But we have a conservative media. In practice if not in self-regard.

That is simply ludicrous.

[Anonymous]

We all knew this. The media feeds us how great the conservatives who are moderates are- ie they do not attack the media for now.

[Anonymous]

Yep. We got Youngkin here in VA because the "elite media" didn't tell us the truth about him.

How the New York Times laundered right-wing propaganda in a piece about Glenn Youngkin
The report featured a "Hillary-Biden" voter who's gone Republican. But some key context was missing.

A New York Times report published Sunday describes the “palpable” energy among supporters of Republican Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin with an anecdote from a man who is presented as encapsulating the rightward shift Virginia is experiencing. But his anecdote actually ended up illustrating how propaganda can be laundered into news reports.

The article, by Jeremy Peters and Matthew Cullen, quotes Miller, identified as a lawyer from McLean, as saying he decided to support Youngkin because of the exact school-related concerns that Youngkin describes as the defining issue of his campaign.

There’s just one problem — a few minutes of vetting revealed that Miller is actually an activist who mostly supports Republicans and has a history of publicly opposing critical race theory (CRT). But none of that gets mentioned in the piece.

https://aaronrupar.substack.com/p/glenn-youngkin-new-york-times-jeremy-peters

Republicans know how to attack the New York Times. But the New York Times lets itself get used by Republicans. It's gross. And it's harming us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our media has a broad pro-Republican bias.

They called Youngkin a moderate.

Why did the media do that?
Well, first, the media that covered Youngkin is part of massive corporations – AT&T owns CNN, Comcast owns MSNBC – and the execs are generally Republicans because tax cuts help corporations even as they hurt workers.

And second, US media has decided they have to be neutral. (This isn't true for media in other countries.)
And the obvious way to exploit neutral media is to lie. Then they cover one sides' lies as equal to the other sides' truthfulness.


So Republicans like Youngkin lie.
And our media covers it as if it's true.

NYT Politics and NYT Opinion is effectively conservative in practice (yes Republican posters, I know your minds are blown, but just use your brains a little bit - everything said here is true, you must admit.).
The most popular parts of NYT are therefore conservative-biased, because they try to cover both sides equally, and one side – Glenn Youngkin's side – is a bunch of liars.

A truly liberal media would be saying the truth, at minimum: that Youngkin is an extremist.

But we have a conservative media. In practice if not in self-regard.



Or maybe these actions actually are moderate for mainstream America and you are the one that’s extreme….I know your mind is blown, but just use your brain a little bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our media has a broad pro-Republican bias.

They called Youngkin a moderate.

Why did the media do that?
Well, first, the media that covered Youngkin is part of massive corporations – AT&T owns CNN, Comcast owns MSNBC – and the execs are generally Republicans because tax cuts help corporations even as they hurt workers.

And second, US media has decided they have to be neutral. (This isn't true for media in other countries.)
And the obvious way to exploit neutral media is to lie. Then they cover one sides' lies as equal to the other sides' truthfulness.


So Republicans like Youngkin lie.
And our media covers it as if it's true.

NYT Politics and NYT Opinion is effectively conservative in practice (yes Republican posters, I know your minds are blown, but just use your brains a little bit - everything said here is true, you must admit.).
The most popular parts of NYT are therefore conservative-biased, because they try to cover both sides equally, and one side – Glenn Youngkin's side – is a bunch of liars.

A truly liberal media would be saying the truth, at minimum: that Youngkin is an extremist.

But we have a conservative media. In practice if not in self-regard.

Or maybe these actions actually are moderate for mainstream America and you are the one that’s extreme….I know your mind is blown, but just use your brain a little bit.

[Anonymous]

I think he is a moderate. Especially for American politics.

[Anonymous]

Which of these executive orders are extremist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think he is a moderate. Especially for American politics.

No he is a right wing nut job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of these executive orders are extremist?

Yes, if you were to choose the midpoint between the parties – the midpoint between Democrats, a traditional broad party in a democracy, and the Republicans, an authoritarian political formation aiming to destroy American democracy and build a US dictatorship/oligarchy
.... then yes, these actions don't seem extremist.

But that just highlights how US media has failed to tell the truth about Youngkin - he's a radical and his party is radical and he is just a garden variety Republican extremist.

As a Canadian, I was shocked to see this in the conservative Globe and Mail, saying the GOP was pushing America towards dictatorship:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-american-polity-is-cracked-and-might-collapse-canada-must-prepare/
Not that I'm surprised – the danger posed by the GOP has been clear.
But that even in an opinion piece the conservative Globe and Mail would say this.

Wow. It's clear to Canadians what's going on in the US. That you, and other Americans, don't see it is a massive MASSIVE failure of the US media - NY Times on down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of these executive orders are extremist?

CRT — it’s part of a culture war, not reality
Masks — it goes against all the guidance of local and national health authority guidance

[Anonymous]

Canada doesn't have a Fox - they don't allow it. That's a big difference

[Anonymous]

Wait, what of those executive orders imperil democracy. Remember, words have meaning.

[Anonymous]

Nobody is preventing anyone from wearing a mask. Do you understand?