Great editorial in the LA times today.
Now, here is my only question. If this balance is achieved, where dems agree to use fox news but not validate it, and reps agree to use the media establishment but not validate it, doesnt that mean that dems are sort of equating their usage of the media establishment with reps use of fox news? Obviously, that cant stand.
Perhaps George Soros needs to start a news channel. But liberal news? That would be too boring, waaaay to boring. Air America has a listenership of about 2. Should everyone just admit that the New York Times has no intention of providing objective news? No, because that is not the case, but Democrats cant just say the times is objective, and just happens to agree with us, always.
But the medium really is the message. Instead of having a bunch of rich assholes scream at you telling you what you should believe, what if democrats dominate the internet, youtube and blogs. Youtube definately played in dems favor in 2006--remember macaca and 'harold, call me?" if the truth is on dems side, then just get the truth out there, no filters. Get it, put it on there, and let the people decide. I, for one, would much rather watch youtube than fox news.
No comments:
Post a Comment