Yep. There’s a reason I moved over even before the v4/2011 fiasco

I like that there is a large contingent of actual socialists whether soc dems, anarchists or the dreaded tankies.

I like that there is a greater anti corporate mindset and I’m less likely to see someone justify something because “well what do you expect, businesses exist to make money”.

I like that there are so many Linux and open source enthusiasts. And privacy enthusiasts. Used to be big on Reddit but became more and more niche over time.

I like that there aren’t pun threads. Maybe that’s not really true culture but more contrast with Reddit.

deleted by creator

I don’t listen to podcasts often. But I like:

• Citations Needed: a podcast about media. Basically goes into how media covers some events and topics from a leftist perspective.

• Cane and Rinse: video game discussions and analyses. Each episode covers a specific game

Anarchists discuss basically all of that and aren’t right wing

What does that possibly have to do with Biden choosing to abuse his clemency powers to spare his failson from the consequences of his actions?

This isn’t an act of progressive or socialist will. This is just another example of a two tiered justice system in this country but also fuel for the fascists. I don’t see a reason to celebrate this unless you’re a Biden.

Democrats, especially the hardcore blue MAGA types, will never duck the “elitist” critiques.

2/3 of this comment section are a bunch of PMC labor aristocrats running defense for millionaires.

Yeah this a real win for the working class and “progressive” politics.

Don’t forget Hispanics!

What is the point of comparing Helene to Katrina? Harvey was also a 4.

Why discount the impact of Katrina just because there were systematic issues? It was a natural disaster and that was the impact.

Because it comes off to me like you’re trying to “well ackshully” about Helene being really the most devastating hurricane.

Why are you making this some type of competition?

You’re nice for engaging in good faith.

It’s a bit funny that people who seem to think they are the politics, Marx, and communism understanders don’t even seem to understand basic Marxism that I picked up in an intro to political philosophy class, which covered Marx for all of about two weeks.

You wouldn’t be here without us

People win suits against the police all the time. It’s just the police rarely face consequences for it, especially as an institution.

As long as there is an appeals process. And it seems there was.

You think this organization’s judgement is some objective algorithm and doesn’t contain its own subjective biases?

Nothing. But a good portion of the electorate did get to learn about the power of marketing and the difference between liberalism and socialism

Yeah, some people work. Have you read Manufacturing Consent?

Either way, the summary is pretty accurate after watching. He devoted 30 seconds to recognizing that anti communism was a major pillar of the news media back then, at least. But that is a major reflection of exactly how they weren’t “unbiased” and basically shows how the regulations and fairness doctrine did very little to expose Americans to ideas outside those accepted by the elites who owned and ran NBC, CBS, ABC, and NYT/WaPo. So to claim that it’s mostly true that they were “unbiased” back then is still a bit ridiculous after such an acknowledgement. “They were mostly unbiased unless you count mainstream, elite American opinion of the 50s/60s as a type of bias”…

Again, no look at the structure of the news media and how they treated the US government’s and major corporations’ words as a major form of sourcing, the importance and influence of advertising, etc.

He has a handful of chosen examples. Manufacturing Consent has case studies documenting coverage of specific events from these media sources.

The populace wasn’t more educated when everyone got their news from the same 5 sources (and a more educated populace is what we should want from our news media.)

They just all mostly agreed and said the same things. There was still bias, it just wasn’t as partisan and people were less likely to disagree because there wasn’t anyone saying otherwise. The faux neutrality was a facade.

If that’s the summary, then the video is overly simplistic and doesn’t understand the actual concept of media bias. The news was biased then too, especially foreign coverage, and it was biased before then. I mean, this goes all the way back to the USS Maine at the very least.

Anyone who wants to talk about media bias and hasn’t read Manufacturing Consent or other similar work needs to be banned from the topic. Learn about the propaganda model. Maybe also read about the Committee on Public Information and Edward Bernays while you’re at it.

I can’t take anyone seriously who really thinks the overall news landscape was less biased when there were only a handful of networks determining news on TV and less alternatives in the print media as well.

Edit: Longer, but better

You’re being pedantic. The dominant ideology of the Democratic party is neoliberalism. Democrats continued neoliberal policies following Reagan, like NAFTA and others. They will consistently defer to the market based solutions and “free enterprise” as opposed to actual socialism. The dominant political user on these platforms (especially .world) are capital D Democrats and liberals. You see this on Reddit a lot in /r/neoliberal.

This user likely isn’t wrong when using this description as a generalization.