It’s not only about Krugman’s editorial. It’s about the big picture, the vast support his point of view drew from professional establishment journalists (which is what Greenwald aimed to show in the piece). It is certainly not about editorial (ok, in a way it is, since even ‘reporting’ is driven and guided by the reporters biases, consciously or otherwise, but it’s not about capital-E editorial being biased). I’ll give you the last word, because I don’t want to derail. I only posted Greenwald’s piece because it shows Krugman’s work may be manipulative and/or compromised.
1 Like
Krugman is certainly very partisan. The title of Greenwald’s piece is “The Unrelenting Pundit-Led Effort to Delegitimize All Negative Reporting About Hillary Clinton.” Krugman’s not a journalist, though, he’s a pundit. This is an important distinction for me. Griping about pundits shaping a partisan message is like complaining about the sky being blue.
20 Likes
The stalwart conservatives in my family have seized on this as The One Truth, b/c if Obama wasn’t the root cause of all things evil, then HRC is. This feels like yet another outgrowth of trump’s grand ability to project his faults onto others–why should the GOP/conservatives look within at their own issues when they can so easily blame someone else?
8 Likes
Right now America is in serious danger of stepping up its oppression of various othered groups, with presidential candidates floating ideas like registration that have reminded some of worse still. It sort of makes a cruel joke of the repeated line that calling conservatives on the awfulness they are asking places them in real danger of such things.
15 Likes
Some people fight fire with fire. I have always found water to be more effective.
6 Likes
Hope it’s not a grease fire.
19 Likes
If that gets you results, I won’t complain. But you don’t need to invent stakes for them that are all too real for many other people, precisely because of what the conservative movement has been advocating. That amounts to dismissing the actual risks being faced.
10 Likes
Did you read the piece? It has absolutely nothing to do with pundits’ writing or editorial based journalism. It’s about a well-respected pundit, Krugman, calling for his journalist peers to self-sensor because reasons.
Edit: But I don’t want to derail. If there are others who want to continue the discussion re: ethics in contemporary journalism, maybe we should branch to a new topic?
3 Likes
Generally speaking, I am a danger to others due to ethics and morals, and not the lack thereof.
1 Like
You called Krugman a journalist, which he isn’t. I was just making sure that distinction remains clear, since it’s an important one.
3 Likes
I am genuinely amazed by just how atrocious Trump is shaping up to be(I was expecting awful; but he has really outdone himself); but it is unfortunate that the Democrats have managed to field one of the least exciting candidates in quite some time, at a time when going off the rails on a crazy train is too much of an option to sleep comfortably.
Sure, there’s a lot of plain old Clinton-derangement-syndrome and nonsense about how HRC took a brief vacation from being too ill and cognitively impaired to do anything to personally found ISIS and lead the attack in Benghazi; but even if you ignore the crazy there isn’t a whole lot to actually like, aside from being the alternative to a true disaster.
9 Likes
He laid low a couple days post Pussygate, and then didn’t totally shit the bed in the debate (i.e., he didn’t set a new low for himself). Both these things probably softened the plummet a little bit.
2 Likes
Post-Pussygate he’s taken the approach of attacking Bill Clinton, which might help for the undecided dingbats he’s trying to bring over. But his new approach has been to bear umbrage at Republicans who dared to criticize him and to go on the warpath against the GOP to the point that his top spokesperson is bragging about damaging downticket races. This probably will not help him.
10 Likes
Also: even though that looks like a tweet from a parody account (but isn’t), his premise here is not entirely flawed. Doing it his way – decorum, logic and sanity be damned – is what got him the nomination.
So it does make sense that he considers doubling-down on the balls-out nastiness a winning strategy. I don’t think he’s right, but that there’s any chance if might work is just scary.
5 Likes
This is indicative of Trump supporters’ mindset:
13 Likes
I don’t understand what that means…you’re a danger to people BECAUSE you are ethical and moral? What?
2 Likes
Best news I’ve heard all election cycle!
19 Likes
Those are not real supporters, they didn’t even add deplorable in front of their names! Where are the rare pepes and awoos?
6 Likes
I can only hope…
5 Likes
It was wrong of me to call Krugman a journo, was just an airhead mistake.
Tangentially related: Are you aware of or have you seen ‘Best of Enemies’?
This film was incredibly illuminating to me, regarding modern cable news and why pundits are so appealing to some people (which might say more about me than the film). But anyways, sorry for posting tangentially relatedly. Really trying to be a better poster. So carry on carrying on.
Regarding original topic: I think, unfortunately, the GOP is going to be just fine. After all, the Democrats have to have somebody to look good next to, right?
3 Likes
