I hate to say it but America is experiencing a hell of a lot more Media Failure than what is described in this article. Actually, if you think about it, our media has failed to stand up for our democracy. That, in my opinion, is why the TDrump administration is achieving so much success.
We should say that it is *mainstream media* that have failed us. There are plenty of independent media such as Propublica, Substack, and numerous podcasts that are excellent.
While that's true enough, the independent media sources you refer to are seldom if ever viewed by the people who might, at least, follow legacy media be it newspapers or broadcast news. This is why *mainstream media* has failed us and is failing us.
Hi everyone - Thanks to the folks at The Contrarian for running my latest column. Lots more about media failures of all kinds over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/
I think a very large part of informed and discerning readers has already stopped reading billionaire or so-called mainstream media. Since the beginning of the year, there are numerous independent news sites available to anyone who is interested.
Also, I think the time is overripe for true media companies to go non-profit.
And yet we need a unifying source, the way the old television broadcast station used to be. The more splintered our media, the more divided we become. That's what I'm seeing, anyway.
It would be nice to have that, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon, especially as the Fairness Doctrine of 1949 was abolished by whom? The sainted Ronnie Reagan in 1987.
Not so fast. I still believe that the Dems need a dedicated streaming platform to counteract Fox News and other propaganda. I can't believe they haven't done it yet. We raised over a billion dollars for a candidate who didn't win. Why couldn't we get a platform off the ground that blends actual facts on current issues, news, candidate rosters, civics education, and yes, entertainment, to draw people in?
Surely there are enough Democratic entities, along with the DNC, that could drive fund raising. Why are we throwing money away on campaign ads and travel in this day and age? I would far more support an effort that would pay dividends via education as well as exposure for candidates nationwide. IF we don't change the status quo soon, we are sunk.
It's beyond me why little old me has to come up with either fanciful or workable ideas. Where is Pete Buttigieg? Give me a call, Pete. I've got ideas.
Great suggestions all, but it would take another billionaire to get a counter-fox up and running. Would that get FCC approval under the current regime? I doubt it.
I definitely agree with you on Pete and I've been asking myself that same question. He doesn't even have a regular substack program. He is such an incredible communicator, he would be great. The only thing I can come up with is the fact he's gay and the Democrats are afraid of the fascists' reaction to him. That's a crying shame, because I think in the meantime the majority of the population is open minded.
And where is that other great communicator, Barack Obama? He's pretty much MIA at a time we really need a polished orator. I guess he got what he needed: a place in history as the first Black American president, a lucrative book deal, and loads of speaking engagements. What a pathetic disappointment he's become.
I heard he was poised "to reenter" the fray, though I have no idea what form that might take. I suspect that his hair is on fire and that he realizes he has to do all he can to safeguard our democracy for his daughters. I know I'd feel that way. How we can let all of this work, sacrifice, and progress slip away and deny the next generations a decent, free life, I do not know.
You are absolutely right about that. Barack and Michelle Obama could get a lot of movement by speaking out. But Barack seems to be satisfied with being used for fund raising. Almost every day, I receive tens of texts asking for money. Today, I received on using Barack's name and one from Chuck Schumer to raise funds. I have been trying everything to shut these #%$*#% &*(_)(**& texts down. Nothing works.
On the other hand, there are many prominent Democrats who are not being heard from. Just the ten or twelve who do speak out are simply not enough. It is disheartening.
I don’t think we need to continue “preaching to the choir” so much as infiltrating right-wing media like Fox, OAN, Newsmax, etc. If Democrats are to ever win again, we have got to deprogram many of their viewers.
Agree, but even that is no guarantee. Watch PBS NewsHour, for instance. I’m constantly yelling at the TV because of their tendency towards “both-sides-ism” and soft-peddling of administration atrocities.
I do not watch any TV news, so I was not aware that even PBS is doing "both-sideism." That is especially disappointing in light of the fact they had all their government funding withdrawn. Meanwhile, I get most of my daily news from the AP website and I donate to them.
This article is both informative and distorting at the same time. Yes, many Americans are receiving distorted information.
But the “both-sides” mindset displayed here falsely equates two very different levels of lies/distortion. MAGA uses flat out lies about Obama era projects, pays no attention to laws about planning such works (or for that matter Trump’s public statement in July 2025 that the East Wing itself would not be touched by the project—something this article also fails to mention) and ignores things like “pay to play” bribery happening in plain view.
“The left?” MSNBC didn’t mention that some folks like ballrooms and think one is needed.
Respectfully, these two things are NOT “both-sides-same”. They just are not, and trying to frame them that way is the sort of “MAGA commits murder, but the Dems are guilty of jaywalking” both-sides-ism that one finds in satirical places such as the NYT Pitchbot.
One of the many reasons we are in this mess is indeed media failure. But it’s failure like this article’s inability to escape the “both sides” mindset where to stay “balanced” they must criticize “both sides” equally…even if that requires wildly distorting truth.
Hi! Actually I call out both-sidesism all the time on They Stand Corrected -- the pretense that problems are equal. This piece is filled with problems involving coverage on the right, and has one reference to something missing on the left! So that's not both-sidesism. But mainstream media does have lots of failures in favor of "left" positions on issues, which I also cover.
Fair enough. But I submit to you that the first three paragraphs of this article frame the argument as a “both-sides” problem—and nowhere else in the article does it refute that framing.
Yes, a reader can read through the article and realize the stark imbalance between #Foxlandia and non-#Foxlandia media distortions. But a reader has to see that on their own. The article does not call attention to the reality that media/information is a “both sides” problem BUT it is NOT a “both sides same” problem.
What I would like to know and have seen no reporting on is: were all the contents of the east wing removed before the demolition or was history destroyed along with the building?
"Construct something new: an information space in which truth is clear, trustworthy, and celebrated."
This is exactly what we need, but it's hard to imagine exactly what this could look like. I think things like The Contrarian are great, but they will only reach a tiny fraction of the audience ill intentioned billionaires are able to buy with what to them is just pennies. Maybe step one is mass abandoning the legacy media, but even then I fear that people will fall back to social media where algorithms will lure people down an even darker path. I don't see how any of this can be fixed without a mass political awakening so that America can remove the influence of the wealthiest corrupting every aspect of our government and media but that awakening will be hard to bring about when the news media is largely united against it or at best apathetic to it.
I hear you. It's also a generational effort. We need to raise the next generational to care deeply about facts and fact checking. We need to teach curiosity and investigation as core life skills. I describe this in Episode 9, which you can find here: https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/secret-rules-make-presidential-debates
Thanks for the reporting, but OMG, I am so tired of writers plugging their Substack columns on the Contrarian. Just mentioning the link in your bio should be enough. For myself, I don't have time or inclination to add one more source of punditry to my very expensive portfolio. That, in fact, is why I subscribe to the Contrarian. Nice blend. Great expertise. Welcome special guests.
Hear hear: “America needs to knock down big legacy media and construct something new: an information space in which truth is clear, trustworthy, and celebrated.“
Your essay captures my experience of most media. I look to journalists to call it as it is and they are not doing that. So I stop paying attention. You help me understand they have abandoned the facts and the truth. Thank you.
Even if the ballroom could be considered a good addition, it is the wrong time to spend $300 million on this grandiose, self-aggrandizing project. And now he says he'll "probably" name it after himself--of course he will. I propose he name it after Charlie Kirk. He'll look especially bad to refuse to do this. (Later someone can rename it for a less divisive, less parisan public figure.)
Yup - in this episode, I discuss that it's not just a matter of optics. If a Democrat did exactly this -- proceeded with a renovation project during a shutdown, and talked about how he and his corporate backers have so much $$ that they can pay for it -- right-wing media would of course call it out. It's Episode 80: https://joshlevs.com/episodes/
Josh, your comments are spot on as to the facts surrounding the ballroom, but the optics have overridden the basics. Trump didn’t get approval for the renovation, then he destroyed the East Wing offices leaving an ugly scar for everyone to see. Not to mentioned that he lied when he said he wouldn’t do that. The painful symbolism of that destruction with a gaping hole in the White House, is weighing on the American public. We also see the prospect of an oversized ballroom that will be gaudily decorated with gold furnishings more appropriate to 18th century France than our country today. Lots of gold while many Americans can’t afford food. I’d like to know if they actually have plans or is this going to be a boondoggle. The ballroom is one more element of chaos in an increasingly chaotic America. Don’t be surprised by the emotions that erupted.
Trump lied about demolishing the East Wing before the pictures were provided by Treasury staff. He is blowing through regulations and the entire approval process that has governed previous renovations, because he doesn't think the laws apply to him. There is also an undercurrent of disdain for the role of the First Lady and those who have come before (including Hillary and Michelle), perhaps founded on his dislike for those two and the fact that his own wife is only doing the minimum she may be contractually required to do.
I hate to say it but America is experiencing a hell of a lot more Media Failure than what is described in this article. Actually, if you think about it, our media has failed to stand up for our democracy. That, in my opinion, is why the TDrump administration is achieving so much success.
Absolutely! The mainstream media failure is widespread. I cover it all the time over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/
Media should stop televising the flattery by foreign leaders and start calling out the lies--every single one.
We should say that it is *mainstream media* that have failed us. There are plenty of independent media such as Propublica, Substack, and numerous podcasts that are excellent.
While that's true enough, the independent media sources you refer to are seldom if ever viewed by the people who might, at least, follow legacy media be it newspapers or broadcast news. This is why *mainstream media* has failed us and is failing us.
Right on! These outlets "preach to the choir." No way do "Cletis" and Lerlene" in rural Alabama subscribe to these.
Hi everyone - Thanks to the folks at The Contrarian for running my latest column. Lots more about media failures of all kinds over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/
Let's meet up there too!
I think a very large part of informed and discerning readers has already stopped reading billionaire or so-called mainstream media. Since the beginning of the year, there are numerous independent news sites available to anyone who is interested.
Also, I think the time is overripe for true media companies to go non-profit.
And yet we need a unifying source, the way the old television broadcast station used to be. The more splintered our media, the more divided we become. That's what I'm seeing, anyway.
It would be nice to have that, but it's not likely to happen anytime soon, especially as the Fairness Doctrine of 1949 was abolished by whom? The sainted Ronnie Reagan in 1987.
Not so fast. I still believe that the Dems need a dedicated streaming platform to counteract Fox News and other propaganda. I can't believe they haven't done it yet. We raised over a billion dollars for a candidate who didn't win. Why couldn't we get a platform off the ground that blends actual facts on current issues, news, candidate rosters, civics education, and yes, entertainment, to draw people in?
Surely there are enough Democratic entities, along with the DNC, that could drive fund raising. Why are we throwing money away on campaign ads and travel in this day and age? I would far more support an effort that would pay dividends via education as well as exposure for candidates nationwide. IF we don't change the status quo soon, we are sunk.
It's beyond me why little old me has to come up with either fanciful or workable ideas. Where is Pete Buttigieg? Give me a call, Pete. I've got ideas.
Great suggestions all, but it would take another billionaire to get a counter-fox up and running. Would that get FCC approval under the current regime? I doubt it.
I definitely agree with you on Pete and I've been asking myself that same question. He doesn't even have a regular substack program. He is such an incredible communicator, he would be great. The only thing I can come up with is the fact he's gay and the Democrats are afraid of the fascists' reaction to him. That's a crying shame, because I think in the meantime the majority of the population is open minded.
I'm thinking along the lines of YouTube, accessible online. How did that get started? (I have no idea :)
I'm not a fan of YouTube. It's part of the Google empire, more billionaires in his majesty's pocket.
And where is that other great communicator, Barack Obama? He's pretty much MIA at a time we really need a polished orator. I guess he got what he needed: a place in history as the first Black American president, a lucrative book deal, and loads of speaking engagements. What a pathetic disappointment he's become.
I heard he was poised "to reenter" the fray, though I have no idea what form that might take. I suspect that his hair is on fire and that he realizes he has to do all he can to safeguard our democracy for his daughters. I know I'd feel that way. How we can let all of this work, sacrifice, and progress slip away and deny the next generations a decent, free life, I do not know.
You are absolutely right about that. Barack and Michelle Obama could get a lot of movement by speaking out. But Barack seems to be satisfied with being used for fund raising. Almost every day, I receive tens of texts asking for money. Today, I received on using Barack's name and one from Chuck Schumer to raise funds. I have been trying everything to shut these #%$*#% &*(_)(**& texts down. Nothing works.
On the other hand, there are many prominent Democrats who are not being heard from. Just the ten or twelve who do speak out are simply not enough. It is disheartening.
I don’t think we need to continue “preaching to the choir” so much as infiltrating right-wing media like Fox, OAN, Newsmax, etc. If Democrats are to ever win again, we have got to deprogram many of their viewers.
Agree, but even that is no guarantee. Watch PBS NewsHour, for instance. I’m constantly yelling at the TV because of their tendency towards “both-sides-ism” and soft-peddling of administration atrocities.
I do not watch any TV news, so I was not aware that even PBS is doing "both-sideism." That is especially disappointing in light of the fact they had all their government funding withdrawn. Meanwhile, I get most of my daily news from the AP website and I donate to them.
To be fair, PBS does cover the Gaza genocide very aggressively.
This article is both informative and distorting at the same time. Yes, many Americans are receiving distorted information.
But the “both-sides” mindset displayed here falsely equates two very different levels of lies/distortion. MAGA uses flat out lies about Obama era projects, pays no attention to laws about planning such works (or for that matter Trump’s public statement in July 2025 that the East Wing itself would not be touched by the project—something this article also fails to mention) and ignores things like “pay to play” bribery happening in plain view.
“The left?” MSNBC didn’t mention that some folks like ballrooms and think one is needed.
Respectfully, these two things are NOT “both-sides-same”. They just are not, and trying to frame them that way is the sort of “MAGA commits murder, but the Dems are guilty of jaywalking” both-sides-ism that one finds in satirical places such as the NYT Pitchbot.
One of the many reasons we are in this mess is indeed media failure. But it’s failure like this article’s inability to escape the “both sides” mindset where to stay “balanced” they must criticize “both sides” equally…even if that requires wildly distorting truth.
Hi! Actually I call out both-sidesism all the time on They Stand Corrected -- the pretense that problems are equal. This piece is filled with problems involving coverage on the right, and has one reference to something missing on the left! So that's not both-sidesism. But mainstream media does have lots of failures in favor of "left" positions on issues, which I also cover.
Fair enough. But I submit to you that the first three paragraphs of this article frame the argument as a “both-sides” problem—and nowhere else in the article does it refute that framing.
Yes, a reader can read through the article and realize the stark imbalance between #Foxlandia and non-#Foxlandia media distortions. But a reader has to see that on their own. The article does not call attention to the reality that media/information is a “both sides” problem BUT it is NOT a “both sides same” problem.
What I would like to know and have seen no reporting on is: were all the contents of the east wing removed before the demolition or was history destroyed along with the building?
You will find the contents of the East Wing for sale on ebay now.
"Construct something new: an information space in which truth is clear, trustworthy, and celebrated."
This is exactly what we need, but it's hard to imagine exactly what this could look like. I think things like The Contrarian are great, but they will only reach a tiny fraction of the audience ill intentioned billionaires are able to buy with what to them is just pennies. Maybe step one is mass abandoning the legacy media, but even then I fear that people will fall back to social media where algorithms will lure people down an even darker path. I don't see how any of this can be fixed without a mass political awakening so that America can remove the influence of the wealthiest corrupting every aspect of our government and media but that awakening will be hard to bring about when the news media is largely united against it or at best apathetic to it.
I hear you. It's also a generational effort. We need to raise the next generational to care deeply about facts and fact checking. We need to teach curiosity and investigation as core life skills. I describe this in Episode 9, which you can find here: https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/secret-rules-make-presidential-debates
Thanks for the reporting, but OMG, I am so tired of writers plugging their Substack columns on the Contrarian. Just mentioning the link in your bio should be enough. For myself, I don't have time or inclination to add one more source of punditry to my very expensive portfolio. That, in fact, is why I subscribe to the Contrarian. Nice blend. Great expertise. Welcome special guests.
Hear hear: “America needs to knock down big legacy media and construct something new: an information space in which truth is clear, trustworthy, and celebrated.“
Your essay captures my experience of most media. I look to journalists to call it as it is and they are not doing that. So I stop paying attention. You help me understand they have abandoned the facts and the truth. Thank you.
Absolutely! Lots more on this over at https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/ send your ideas, questions, etc. :)
Even if the ballroom could be considered a good addition, it is the wrong time to spend $300 million on this grandiose, self-aggrandizing project. And now he says he'll "probably" name it after himself--of course he will. I propose he name it after Charlie Kirk. He'll look especially bad to refuse to do this. (Later someone can rename it for a less divisive, less parisan public figure.)
Yup - in this episode, I discuss that it's not just a matter of optics. If a Democrat did exactly this -- proceeded with a renovation project during a shutdown, and talked about how he and his corporate backers have so much $$ that they can pay for it -- right-wing media would of course call it out. It's Episode 80: https://joshlevs.com/episodes/
Josh, your comments are spot on as to the facts surrounding the ballroom, but the optics have overridden the basics. Trump didn’t get approval for the renovation, then he destroyed the East Wing offices leaving an ugly scar for everyone to see. Not to mentioned that he lied when he said he wouldn’t do that. The painful symbolism of that destruction with a gaping hole in the White House, is weighing on the American public. We also see the prospect of an oversized ballroom that will be gaudily decorated with gold furnishings more appropriate to 18th century France than our country today. Lots of gold while many Americans can’t afford food. I’d like to know if they actually have plans or is this going to be a boondoggle. The ballroom is one more element of chaos in an increasingly chaotic America. Don’t be surprised by the emotions that erupted.
Trump lied about demolishing the East Wing before the pictures were provided by Treasury staff. He is blowing through regulations and the entire approval process that has governed previous renovations, because he doesn't think the laws apply to him. There is also an undercurrent of disdain for the role of the First Lady and those who have come before (including Hillary and Michelle), perhaps founded on his dislike for those two and the fact that his own wife is only doing the minimum she may be contractually required to do.