Random Thoughts XIX

[HeatFanLifer]

Spoiler:

Lifer, just read this book by Ezra Klein named "Why we're polarized" and thought of recent convos I've had with you and few others in my community about media literacy and the likes. He's a liberal for sure, but the takes are pretty non-partisan, you would like the book I think. Never a better, and thorough explanation on how Trump supporters are rational actors in the scheme of things.

Correct me if I’m wrong here about what Klein states Bish, but he basically says the two party system is inherently polarizing. I have no disagreement with that. The issue I have is:

1) He provides no alternative, noting a multiparty system is worse due to deadlock

And 2) He fails to note the culpability of the press in promoting partisanship

I think this current structure of the media promotion of party politics really began when Fox News called the election for Bush in 2000. After Fox called Florida for Bush, the media then instantly jumped on the badwagon calling Florida for Bush. What other outlets at the time failed to realize though, was that Fox was pulling a partisan move.

After that card was played, many in the media over a couple of years time began to realize that independent unbiased journalism does not gain viewers and since Fox was ok with who they were, liberal leaning news organization were justified in doing the same. I think this was a mistake.

The strength of the press and even the liberal structure was showing diverse points of view, including conservative views. Instead, diversity of thought began to be discouraged to unify a message and win elections (which was what the conservatices were doing). Thus began a downward spiral of breaking down barriers between actual reporting and party talking points.

This breakdown of barriers has continued to evolve to the point that now many once prominent news outlets not only fail to independently report stories that disagree with party position, they are now even banning op-eds as well. Nothing good will come of this. We need dialogue with those we disagree with.

I’m hoping this changes, but open discussions of people to people without party talking points, is necessary and should be encouraged. Something now it appears to me that social media and even the press is discouraging.

You read it already? He lays some alternatives in the final chapter, although he's disclaims everything to be of his own opinion.

He said that we'd likely be better off with a parliamentary system, but adds that if you just look at some of the governments over in Europe that you can see that it isn't a panacea for polarization. Ends it by saying that proportional representation, something like Rank choice voting, would likely work better in this country, as much as the era of Dixiecrats/Democrats/liberal Republicans/Conservative Republicans of the previous era (imbued with hopefully less racism)

The second note is unconscionable to me, maybe 3/4's of the book is speaking on the culpability of the press in this and their assist to the rise of identitarian media- especially his own Vox media. Idk about that take. I thought he spoke some grace to his profession, especially with how he shaped the convo with the APSA comittee report from the 50's stating that there wasn't nearly enough polarization at the time, a pov that overarchs our current media praxis quite succinctly imo

2000 might be a bit late, if you can remember Fox's coverage of the Clinton impeachment, but I think most of the hyper-partisan media had it's slow start with the strike down of the FCC Fairness Doctrine and Nixon's memo's of administration based media in the 70's- not from the book, but my take.

We can't have good faith dialogue when we can't agree on facts. A reality you can see reflected on any 5 minutes of any congressional hearing these days- gridlock's at a dead high. Change is the rule of everything, so it's bound to happen- albeit through reform before any real dialogue though.

I didn't expect much, but was thoroughly surprised at how deep the book went.

I skimmed it. He spends a lot of time examining the media, but my point is he seems to think all media is the same. It’s not. There is Liberal media and then there is Conservative media. Conservative media thrives on those outrage stories of the day that he notes. Liberal media however, traditionally took an in depth look into issues and thrived on advancing discussion.

Conservative media has been around for decades doing what they do like trying to get Clinton impeached as you note, but Liberal media (nor Fox news for that matter) did not resort to the official party line until after 2000.

Trump thrived on this in 2016. He was not looking to appeal to Progressive voters. They were already polarized, as were the Conservative voters as Klein notes. Rather, he was looking to appeal to enough moderate voters and did so by noting how biased media against him was. It worked. Will it work in 2020? I’m not sure. But I think the liberal media is playing the wrong game here. They need to ask tough questions to all sides. Educate liberal viewers in a diversity of thought so they can have that dialogue with moderates and even conservatives. I don’t think this is occurring anymore. It’s both sides playing the same game and that will inherently advantage conservatives. When people have uncertainty about something, they tend to go with what they know.

[Bishop45]

Spoiler:

Correct me if I’m wrong here about what Klein states Bish, but he basically says the two party system is inherently polarizing. I have no disagreement with that. The issue I have is:

1) He provides no alternative, noting a multiparty system is worse due to deadlock

And 2) He fails to note the culpability of the press in promoting partisanship

I think this current structure of the media promotion of party politics really began when Fox News called the election for Bush in 2000. After Fox called Florida for Bush, the media then instantly jumped on the badwagon calling Florida for Bush. What other outlets at the time failed to realize though, was that Fox was pulling a partisan move.

After that card was played, many in the media over a couple of years time began to realize that independent unbiased journalism does not gain viewers and since Fox was ok with who they were, liberal leaning news organization were justified in doing the same. I think this was a mistake.

The strength of the press and even the liberal structure was showing diverse points of view, including conservative views. Instead, diversity of thought began to be discouraged to unify a message and win elections (which was what the conservatices were doing). Thus began a downward spiral of breaking down barriers between actual reporting and party talking points.

This breakdown of barriers has continued to evolve to the point that now many once prominent news outlets not only fail to independently report stories that disagree with party position, they are now even banning op-eds as well. Nothing good will come of this. We need dialogue with those we disagree with.

I’m hoping this changes, but open discussions of people to people without party talking points, is necessary and should be encouraged. Something now it appears to me that social media and even the press is discouraging.

You read it already? He lays some alternatives in the final chapter, although he's disclaims everything to be of his own opinion.

He said that we'd likely be better off with a parliamentary system, but adds that if you just look at some of the governments over in Europe that you can see that it isn't a panacea for polarization. Ends it by saying that proportional representation, something like Rank choice voting, would likely work better in this country, as much as the era of Dixiecrats/Democrats/liberal Republicans/Conservative Republicans of the previous era (imbued with hopefully less racism)

The second note is unconscionable to me, maybe 3/4's of the book is speaking on the culpability of the press in this and their assist to the rise of identitarian media- especially his own Vox media. Idk about that take. I thought he spoke some grace to his profession, especially with how he shaped the convo with the APSA comittee report from the 50's stating that there wasn't nearly enough polarization at the time, a pov that overarchs our current media praxis quite succinctly imo

2000 might be a bit late, if you can remember Fox's coverage of the Clinton impeachment, but I think most of the hyper-partisan media had it's slow start with the strike down of the FCC Fairness Doctrine and Nixon's memo's of administration based media in the 70's- not from the book, but my take.

We can't have good faith dialogue when we can't agree on facts. A reality you can see reflected on any 5 minutes of any congressional hearing these days- gridlock's at a dead high. Change is the rule of everything, so it's bound to happen- albeit through reform before any real dialogue though.

I didn't expect much, but was thoroughly surprised at how deep the book went.

I skimmed it. He spends a lot of time examining the media, but my point is he seems to think all media is the same. It’s not. There is Liberal media and then there is Conservative media. Conservative media thrives on those outrage stories of the day that he notes. Liberal media however, traditionally took an in depth look into issues and thrived on advancing discussion.

Conservative media has been around for decades doing what they do like trying to get Clinton impeached as you note, but Liberal media (nor Fox news for that matter) did not resort to the official party line until after 2000.

Trump thrived on this in 2016. He was not looking to appeal to Progressive voters. They were already polarized, as were the Conservative voters as Klein notes. Rather, he was looking to appeal to enough moderate voters and did so by noting how biased media against him was. It worked. Will it work in 2020? I’m not sure. But I think the liberal media is playing the wrong game here. They need to ask tough questions to all sides. Educate liberal viewers in a diversity of thought so they can have that dialogue with moderates and even conservatives. I don’t think this is occurring anymore. It’s both sides playing the same game and that will inherently advantage conservatives. When people have uncertainty about something, they tend to go with what they know.

Pretty much in agreement, he did spend most of the book speaking as if both ideologies were coming from the same plank, and in a lot of ways they are, but to his credit he spent a better part of one of the final chapters describing their differences and to the effect and reasons that conservative media has largely disowned peer-reviewed fact-finding and learning institutions as 'inherently liberal.'- you probably missed some of that, but issa decent read is all.

Biden doesn't have Comey, or just generally being a woman standing against him, so it feels safe to say that- today- he's likely already won the popular vote; will it be enough to stand tall against the electoral college? We'll see.

[HeatFanLifer]

Spoiler:

You read it already? He lays some alternatives in the final chapter, although he's disclaims everything to be of his own opinion.

He said that we'd likely be better off with a parliamentary system, but adds that if you just look at some of the governments over in Europe that you can see that it isn't a panacea for polarization. Ends it by saying that proportional representation, something like Rank choice voting, would likely work better in this country, as much as the era of Dixiecrats/Democrats/liberal Republicans/Conservative Republicans of the previous era (imbued with hopefully less racism)

The second note is unconscionable to me, maybe 3/4's of the book is speaking on the culpability of the press in this and their assist to the rise of identitarian media- especially his own Vox media. Idk about that take. I thought he spoke some grace to his profession, especially with how he shaped the convo with the APSA comittee report from the 50's stating that there wasn't nearly enough polarization at the time, a pov that overarchs our current media praxis quite succinctly imo

2000 might be a bit late, if you can remember Fox's coverage of the Clinton impeachment, but I think most of the hyper-partisan media had it's slow start with the strike down of the FCC Fairness Doctrine and Nixon's memo's of administration based media in the 70's- not from the book, but my take.

We can't have good faith dialogue when we can't agree on facts. A reality you can see reflected on any 5 minutes of any congressional hearing these days- gridlock's at a dead high. Change is the rule of everything, so it's bound to happen- albeit through reform before any real dialogue though.

I didn't expect much, but was thoroughly surprised at how deep the book went.

I skimmed it. He spends a lot of time examining the media, but my point is he seems to think all media is the same. It’s not. There is Liberal media and then there is Conservative media. Conservative media thrives on those outrage stories of the day that he notes. Liberal media however, traditionally took an in depth look into issues and thrived on advancing discussion.

Conservative media has been around for decades doing what they do like trying to get Clinton impeached as you note, but Liberal media (nor Fox news for that matter) did not resort to the official party line until after 2000.

Trump thrived on this in 2016. He was not looking to appeal to Progressive voters. They were already polarized, as were the Conservative voters as Klein notes. Rather, he was looking to appeal to enough moderate voters and did so by noting how biased media against him was. It worked. Will it work in 2020? I’m not sure. But I think the liberal media is playing the wrong game here. They need to ask tough questions to all sides. Educate liberal viewers in a diversity of thought so they can have that dialogue with moderates and even conservatives. I don’t think this is occurring anymore. It’s both sides playing the same game and that will inherently advantage conservatives. When people have uncertainty about something, they tend to go with what they know.

Pretty much in agreement, he did spend most of the book speaking as if both ideologies were coming from the same plank, and in a lot of ways they are, but to his credit he spent a better part of one of the final chapters describing their differences and to the effect and reasons that conservative media has largely disowned peer-reviewed fact-finding and learning institutions as 'inherently liberal.'- you probably missed some of that, but issa decent read is all.

Biden doesn't have Comey, or just generally being a woman standing against him, so it feels safe to say that- today- he's likely already won the popular vote; will it be enough to stand tall against the electoral college? We'll see.

I’ll look for the section you were referring to and read more into it. I skim a lot of books as I like to gain a lot of general insights, but my in-depth knowledge on various subjects is narrow. Wish I had more time to read. Maybe I should stop looking for gifs/videos to make fun of Iggie...or not.

[HeatIn5]

Asking for a friend - how do I officially submit that username change?

HerroOfMiami incoming before we ship him to Washington

[goodboy]

Asking for a friend - how do I officially submit that username change?

HerroOfMiami incoming before we ship him to Washington

here baby

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1831514&start=160

post a link to your profile in the post too baby

[IggieCC]

For New Zealanders eddie

But I'm leaning toward the opinion that the virus is losing its potency. It's not like that was never going to happen. It's a known fact that virus sometimes goes away. When they can't spread and survive like they used to, they mutate to (generally) weaken themselves so that they can live in their hosts longer. If they can't spread by mutating, then they will just cease to exist. GG eddie

Read on Twitter

[IggieCC]

Cops done and over with after 30 yrs, but we still have this gem

Watch on YouTube

I will not miss the show "Cops" but I will miss the GOAT OP song bish

[IggieCC]

Asking for a friend - how do I officially submit that username change?

HerroOfMiami incoming before we ship him to Washington

here baby

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1831514&start=160

post a link to your profile in the post too baby

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1831514#p75605652

[HeatFanLifer]

Asking for a friend - how do I officially submit that username change?

HerroOfMiami incoming before we ship him to Washington

here baby

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1831514&start=160

post a link to your profile in the post too baby

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=1831514#p75605652

Dr_Heat to Doc

memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=168807

Thanks

Dr_Heat,

That Username is already in use.

Do you have anything else in mind?

Please let me know.

I believe he goes by Armando now.

[goodboy]

For New Zealanders eddie

But I'm leaning toward the opinion that the virus is losing its potency. It's not like that was never going to happen. It's a known fact that virus sometimes goes away. When they can't spread and survive like they used to, they mutate to (generally) weaken themselves so that they can live in their hosts longer. If they can't spread by mutating, then they will just cease to exist. GG eddie

Read on Twitter

Been using the wealth simple app and securing some.

[HeatFanLifer]

For New Zealanders eddie

But I'm leaning toward the opinion that the virus is losing its potency. It's not like that was never going to happen. It's a known fact that virus sometimes goes away. When they can't spread and survive like they used to, they mutate to (generally) weaken themselves so that they can live in their hosts longer. If they can't spread by mutating, then they will just cease to exist. GG eddie

Read on Twitter

Been using the wealth simple app and securing some.

I’ve been staying out of the market until after Q3. Probably a better economy in Canada right now though.

[HeatFanLifer]

Spoiler:

I skimmed it. He spends a lot of time examining the media, but my point is he seems to think all media is the same. It’s not. There is Liberal media and then there is Conservative media. Conservative media thrives on those outrage stories of the day that he notes. Liberal media however, traditionally took an in depth look into issues and thrived on advancing discussion.

Conservative media has been around for decades doing what they do like trying to get Clinton impeached as you note, but Liberal media (nor Fox news for that matter) did not resort to the official party line until after 2000.

Trump thrived on this in 2016. He was not looking to appeal to Progressive voters. They were already polarized, as were the Conservative voters as Klein notes. Rather, he was looking to appeal to enough moderate voters and did so by noting how biased media against him was. It worked. Will it work in 2020? I’m not sure. But I think the liberal media is playing the wrong game here. They need to ask tough questions to all sides. Educate liberal viewers in a diversity of thought so they can have that dialogue with moderates and even conservatives. I don’t think this is occurring anymore. It’s both sides playing the same game and that will inherently advantage conservatives. When people have uncertainty about something, they tend to go with what they know.

Pretty much in agreement, he did spend most of the book speaking as if both ideologies were coming from the same plank, and in a lot of ways they are, but to his credit he spent a better part of one of the final chapters describing their differences and to the effect and reasons that conservative media has largely disowned peer-reviewed fact-finding and learning institutions as 'inherently liberal.'- you probably missed some of that, but issa decent read is all.

Biden doesn't have Comey, or just generally being a woman standing against him, so it feels safe to say that- today- he's likely already won the popular vote; will it be enough to stand tall against the electoral college? We'll see.

The New York Times came out with an Op-Ed today calling for more diversity of thought in journalism. Discusses many of the ideas we have been talking about here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/tom-cotton-op-ed.html

“There is a spirit of ferocious intellectual intolerance sweeping the country and much of the journalistic establishment with it. Contrary opinions aren’t just wrong but unworthy of discussion. The range of political views deemed morally unfit for publication seems to grow ever wider. “

[IggieCC]

This phucking guy is so bored that he's replying to his blank post SMDH

[HeatFanLifer]

This phucking guy is so bored that he's replying to his blank post SMDH

Bish and I have been talking outside of Iggie controlled channels.

[Chalm Down]

Broke my quarentine chaste for some pussae

Might not be covid, but I noticed some brown stuff on my sweatpants the other morning- no idea what it is

maybe it was bustelo

[Chalm Down]

For New Zealanders eddie

But I'm leaning toward the opinion that the virus is losing its potency. It's not like that was never going to happen. It's a known fact that virus sometimes goes away. When they can't spread and survive like they used to, they mutate to (generally) weaken themselves so that they can live in their hosts longer. If they can't spread by mutating, then they will just cease to exist. GG eddie

lets go live with rex for the next ten months

or is he in aus

[Chalm Down]

There’s like 18 seasons of pokemon. Have you seen them all?

I think I watched it up until the third region

Last season seemed intedasting though, at least

Spoiler:

Ash

won the

Spoiler:

championship

finally

Are there 18 regions or seasons?

8 regions and 18 seasons

I've been tempted to get the game for the new region during lockdown but Nintendo switch is so pricey

[IggieCC]

For New Zealanders eddie

But I'm leaning toward the opinion that the virus is losing its potency. It's not like that was never going to happen. It's a known fact that virus sometimes goes away. When they can't spread and survive like they used to, they mutate to (generally) weaken themselves so that they can live in their hosts longer. If they can't spread by mutating, then they will just cease to exist. GG eddie

lets go live with rex for the next ten months

or is he in aus

Rex lives in Switzerland or Austria or somewhere Euro IIRC.

We have lots of Aussie posters such as Wilts and that cursing poster, but I don't recall any Kiwis.

[IggieCC]

I think I watched it up until the third region

Last season seemed intedasting though, at least

Spoiler:

Ash

won the

Spoiler:

championship

finally

Are there 18 regions or seasons?

8 regions and 18 seasons

I've been tempted to get the game for the new region during lockdown but Nintendo switch is so pricey

That's too much Pokemon IMHO.

Use your stimulus money to buy Switch. I recommend Wish.com for your maximum savings and thank me later hopefully in time for X-mas

[goodboy]

Watch on YouTube