Listen now | Subscribe to Reactionary Minds: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTube Reactionary Minds is a project of The UnPopulist. Hosted by Aaron Ross Powell. Produced by Landry Ayres. The following is a lightly edited transcript of Reactionary Minds’ interview with Greg Sargent, a columnist at The Washington Post and author of the book An Uncivil War: Taking Back Our Democracy in an Age of Trumpian Disinformation and Thunderdome Politics. The transcript has been edited for flow and clarity.
OK, I'll answer your rhetorical question. No. The mainstream media's easily observable liberal bias is not a myth.
Even if you say that things have improved in the decade since Journolist or since NPR executive Ron Schiller's mask slipped, or since Jonah Goldberg's excellent rant*; the bias is easily observable today. Take for example CNN's coverage of Dave Chappelle's SNL monologue:
In it we learn that "Chappelle name-checked...Senate candidate Herschel Walker". Well. Here's what Chappelle actually said about Walker "he's observably stupid".
Interesting interview, but I have to respectfully state I think his views on left-wing mainstream media bias are way off the mark.
This is coming from a 2020 Biden voter who believes the right-wing media machine's bias is currently much worse than that of the mainstream media. But to seemingly completely deny any significant institutional bias, and to say that contrary to there being any bias, that actually the media over-compensates and tries to understand the right more than it really should, seems to me to be the perfect example of a journalist living in a political bubble.
Mainstream outlets in terms of staffing are objectively dominated by those on the left. There is a plethora of examples of the journalist minorities not only on the right, but also in the middle, being harassed and forced out of their positions due to their positions. In an environment like that, institutional bias should be the overwhelming expected outcome.
My main media resource is likely NPR. I like NPR, but their left-wing bias in both coverage of stories and choice of what stories they cover is massive, and is detrimental to their journalistic mission.
Greg seems to state that the media is more left wing simply because they are seeking to find the truth (clearly showing his own biases). On issues like, say, the claims of a stolen election, that has merit. But on an issue of say, abortion, there is no provable objective right or wrong. Abortion support is an inherently subjective issue. There is no provable 'truth', and society has not come to a firm subjective conclusion, like it has on many other subjective issues. Mainstream media coverage makes it clear where their biases lie though (and no, I'm not an anti-abortion extremist).
Sadly, I believe the reality of mainstream media bias, and the refusal of the left to acknowledge it and let more voices on the right to get 'in' the elite media institutions, has been one of the key drivers in the right-wing media machine's rise.
I think the reaction of many in the mainstream media in America to the recent file drops by Elon Musk should be evidence enough of clear left wing bias in the MSM. Either by ignoring it or trying to discredit the journalists who were provided with the files has been really revealing.
I think Greg fails to look in the mirror for this article, which is so typical of an MSM journavist (not a typo)
They've been dismissive of the Twitter Files stuff because there's nothing there, and nothing people who've been following Twitter's content moderation didn't already know about. Any sturm und drang about it is concentrated among right-wingers desperate to make a story out of nothing, or eager to confirm narratives it does little or nothing to confirm.
So Twitter and then FBI colluding to cover up a very real story is not a story because... People are already aware that this is how Twitter moderation works? That the FBI tells them to moderate certain content... That's not a story? Amazing stuff.
Btw can you enlighten me on how attacking the journalists who are sharing information in the Twitter files is "dismissive"? If it was a no nothing story, then why attack the journalists who are sharing it? Just dismiss it. No biggie. But instead, the journalists (Matt Taibbi, bari Weiss) are attacked for sharing it. Very dismissive stuff, there
A very thoughtful interview, thank you.
OK, I'll answer your rhetorical question. No. The mainstream media's easily observable liberal bias is not a myth.
Even if you say that things have improved in the decade since Journolist or since NPR executive Ron Schiller's mask slipped, or since Jonah Goldberg's excellent rant*; the bias is easily observable today. Take for example CNN's coverage of Dave Chappelle's SNL monologue:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/13/entertainment/dave-chappelle-snl-monologue-kanye-cec/index.html
In it we learn that "Chappelle name-checked...Senate candidate Herschel Walker". Well. Here's what Chappelle actually said about Walker "he's observably stupid".
* https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/hell-you-people-jonah-goldberg/
Jim...And your comments are disrespectful and uncivil. Please refrain
Interesting interview, but I have to respectfully state I think his views on left-wing mainstream media bias are way off the mark.
This is coming from a 2020 Biden voter who believes the right-wing media machine's bias is currently much worse than that of the mainstream media. But to seemingly completely deny any significant institutional bias, and to say that contrary to there being any bias, that actually the media over-compensates and tries to understand the right more than it really should, seems to me to be the perfect example of a journalist living in a political bubble.
Mainstream outlets in terms of staffing are objectively dominated by those on the left. There is a plethora of examples of the journalist minorities not only on the right, but also in the middle, being harassed and forced out of their positions due to their positions. In an environment like that, institutional bias should be the overwhelming expected outcome.
My main media resource is likely NPR. I like NPR, but their left-wing bias in both coverage of stories and choice of what stories they cover is massive, and is detrimental to their journalistic mission.
Greg seems to state that the media is more left wing simply because they are seeking to find the truth (clearly showing his own biases). On issues like, say, the claims of a stolen election, that has merit. But on an issue of say, abortion, there is no provable objective right or wrong. Abortion support is an inherently subjective issue. There is no provable 'truth', and society has not come to a firm subjective conclusion, like it has on many other subjective issues. Mainstream media coverage makes it clear where their biases lie though (and no, I'm not an anti-abortion extremist).
Sadly, I believe the reality of mainstream media bias, and the refusal of the left to acknowledge it and let more voices on the right to get 'in' the elite media institutions, has been one of the key drivers in the right-wing media machine's rise.
I think the reaction of many in the mainstream media in America to the recent file drops by Elon Musk should be evidence enough of clear left wing bias in the MSM. Either by ignoring it or trying to discredit the journalists who were provided with the files has been really revealing.
I think Greg fails to look in the mirror for this article, which is so typical of an MSM journavist (not a typo)
They've been dismissive of the Twitter Files stuff because there's nothing there, and nothing people who've been following Twitter's content moderation didn't already know about. Any sturm und drang about it is concentrated among right-wingers desperate to make a story out of nothing, or eager to confirm narratives it does little or nothing to confirm.
Hang on..
So Twitter and then FBI colluding to cover up a very real story is not a story because... People are already aware that this is how Twitter moderation works? That the FBI tells them to moderate certain content... That's not a story? Amazing stuff.
Btw can you enlighten me on how attacking the journalists who are sharing information in the Twitter files is "dismissive"? If it was a no nothing story, then why attack the journalists who are sharing it? Just dismiss it. No biggie. But instead, the journalists (Matt Taibbi, bari Weiss) are attacked for sharing it. Very dismissive stuff, there
I will continue