Always is. Whenever the economy looks bad and it starts feeling more zero sum, populations become very susceptible to arguments about who is taking your slice of the pie. Right wing arguments that focus on in group vs out group messages become very convincing during those periods and you neither have to be Capital R Racist or poor to be swayed by them.
I think the press today is especially badly positions to cover this phenomenon properly, and so tends to continue to rely on “both sides” type coverage, or weighing their coverage on what people think even when it is objectively not defensible. In effect, they launder the message and give an air of respectability. And that’s before we even get into the more modern issue of social media bubbles fueled by bad faith but comforting bad actors, or outright disinformation.
Any objective coverage needs context and I find myself asking what would be that context. Would it be based on the UN, the US, EU or PRC? You could say the context should be based on morels/fairness but how do you define those and get it out therer using the current platforms.
One of the reasons I find listening/reading/watching news unbearable is that rather than engaging in what is being described, I find myself asking who it benefits, who are the stakeholders and why is it on the news in the first place. I cannot escape that mindset.
I’ve listened to a fair few in of the worst offenders in the US media talk about their thought process with this. I think everyone is aware with the idea that there is a “liberal bias” in our media, and that seems to have created the primary driver for those involved to do their job in a way that protects them from being tagged with that label. To do that necessitates them doing their job badly and end up getting to a point where they are both sidesing issues like “should we teach the controversy in schools of whether the Holocaust was real?” Despite bending over themselves to appear balanced they still dont avoid the crticisms of exhibiting their “liberal bias” because the criticism was never made in good faith in the first place.
I’d argue that it’s a very important skill, as tiring as it is. Even if we might think a particular news source is reliable, especially if it’s something that confirms our biases, it’s always good to challenge that to be sure.
I guess the US is the biggest playground where this is being played out and I do not know the solution, other than having a branch of government, much as the FBI, CIA, etc., that is responsible for capturing and presenting the news - sounds scary even typing it but what else is there. If every agency reporting the news is being backed by an “interest” or perceived as being so, then there is little to no hope of anyone believing anything - not to say that what I’ve suggested is going to change that and particularly as there’s an abundance of deep/shallow conspiracy theories abound in the US.
Eventually, there comes a point when it is no longer possible capture or articulate any news. The recent exchange between Tucker Carlson and John Fetterman (captured in HuffPost) was quite bizarre and serves as a case and point… so many layers and it left me with a, “I’ve just killed some brain cells that were being saved for sacrifice at the next booze up…”
Indeed - and as such I had a disclaimer… but who else has the resource or interest in doing so? Of course it also comes down to whether the populous want to hear the news or not.
If only that was true… in reality fascism has never been very far away from power, in one form or another. After the war, many people were still convinced fascists, not least the Vatican who had supported Mussolini all the way. The successive Christian Democratic regimes had to take this into account when taking their policies. They made a balancing act between progressively minimizing the influence of the left, keeping the Vatican happy, and also the influent mafia bosses. At least, they maintained a sense of dignity around the function of the state.
Then, who came into power when people finally got tired of all that mix of corruption and incompetence during the nineties? Berlusconi, the clown, the populist, the media man, backed by parts of the mafia and neofascist groups. His long reign transformed Italy in a banana republic (utter concentration of economic, media and political power, almost in one hand), and discredited the function of state head with his numerous scandals. All of this was only mitigated by the fact that the country was supported and stabilized by the EU.
Since, it has gone back and fourth. Salvini for instance is nothing less than a neo-fascist, and that cunt has already enjoyed spells of significant power.
Now, this new neo-fascist alliance is the latest form of the same. Basically, these people always say and do the same insane things, and for diverse reasons (among others Berlusconi still holding all major private TV companies of the country), it appeals to many people.
Maybe that’s the context of the rise of fascism in Europe. However, how do you explain it in countries where general people barely has the opportunity to vote?
Look at the recent shit storm over Biden’s office of disinformation. It was an initiative that is sorely needed, but the people best positioned to operate it (the federal government) are the ones the people have the least faith in doing so. Even beyond the issue of whether a government agency could run a quality news department, the public would never give them a chance to.
These ones are a really pain in the arse. With the understanding that the predictions aren’t perfect and are volatile at the best of times, and there is no clear start time you’re still looking for some sort of “ok, when is this thing going to get here?” to help with your prep and expectation setting. This one is moving so slowly and big enough that there really isn’t a good way to answer to answer that, and that means we’re going to have days of tropical storm conditions that can cause damage but generally isn’t terrible, but can make people let their guard down in time for the worst of the conditions to hit.
Im working this morning to use a couple of morning meetings to call in on my phone while clearing all the shit from my back yard into the basement in preparation.
Now, I assume when it makes landfall, De Santis is going to insist that the Federal government not declare a state of emergency and get all that financial aid from blue states?
The State has already mandated evacuations from certain regions of the gulf coast. It’s a Nanny-State, anti-business policy bowing down to scientist who dont really know anything.
Fatality rate cannot be any more than 0.0001%, I don’t understand why there are all these restrictions of civil liberties. It is not even a serious flu.
