All of what you say is true. What you don't say is how one can afford to access all the different news sites one needs to form a well rounded picture. I am no longer satisfied from getting all my news from one or even a few sources.
Result: I spend most of my day reading different articles on different sites. If I wasn't retired, I couldn't do that, but since I am retired I can't afford to read all the sites I would like to. Talk about a Catch-22!
Excellent point! I know this answer will be ironic, but I have shown my paid subscribers a way to access most of the big news media for free, legally. I do have to establish a business model, so I don't give away money-saving content for free. On the plus side, I have kept my paid subscription rate almost as low as Substack allows. And subscribers tell me they're saving $ overall by following the steps I suggest.
So many big news agencies are failing the basics of fact checking. They don't deserve your hard earned -- and saved -- money!
I said the same thing on a different sub stack column. How we miss the days when we had the Washington Post in the New York Times to help us deal with the Vietnam war, Watergate, Pentagon papers etc. Back when they knew how to do real journalism. I blame the Internet!
That's even more true than you may realize! In Episode 43, I showed that the Post has been *literally* ignoring its own reporting from that same era (around Watergate days) when that reporting doesn't match its current desire to rewrite history. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/wapos-revisionist-history-on-munich
Think where we would be without the Internet today. There would be no alternate source of news, such as this one. There would be no free editorializing. There would be no easily reached sources of facts, rather than government garbled nonsense ("new numbers"). The Internet is responsible for many bad things, but I do not ever wish to be without it again.
There are no Edward R. Murrows, et al., on television and network news these days. It's all Corporatespeak, and sometimes Corporate scripted.
Oh I know that, don’t take my rant as something I really believe. When the Internet first became a “thing” I was working for a big company, and I thought it was fantastic, I said this would be wonderful people will have all the information they need to make good decisions. Hence my disappointment!
I blame the unlimited greed of the fascist billionaire/millionaire/CEO/shareholder class. The internet has made it worse in some, but better in other cases.
Yes, The Washington Post used to my US information source, the Guardian US edition and Der Spiegel my international sources to stay balanced. I also do remember reading about the Vietnam War, the Pentagon papers, Watergate, etc. in real time. Now I am old and often I think I wasn't born one minute too late. I wouldn't want to go through what those generations after us have to go through in a country so divided and so broken. All of this started in 2015, when the orange felon got 10 times more coverage than all other persons, including Biden during his administration, combined. Then, in 2021 the both-sideism started and no one newspaper has been reliable since then.
I actually blame the Democrats in Congress more than the fascists with what is happening now. The Democrats went along with far to many changes of the various laws to make all the greed and the American vulture capitalism possible. Now we see the result: a president who is a convicted felon and corrupt mob boss grifter, his fascist hangers-on everywhere in Congress, the McConnell/Roberts court and the totally ignorant voters and non-voters, who are ignorant also, otherwise they would vote.
For far too long Democrats have gone along to get along, which was used by the fascists to their advantage. There have been and there still are far too many elected positions on the local, state and federal level that are not even contested by the Democrats. Here in Arkansas there are numerous positions on the ballot where the only contestants are fascists or "libertarians." Not one Democrat. All of it is a crying shame.
Let’s support the new wave of Dems we are advocating no election should go uncontested, and are stepping up, common people who believe in values. Don’t give up on all the Democrats. There are plenty of good ones out there, we just have to look out for them and help them!
While I advocate letting no seat go uncontested, we have to run effective candidates. Dragging in people at the last minute (i.e.--after the primary), which happens in my home county in Indiana, and often in the state house elections, sets them and the Democratic party up for failure. Creating a legacy of failure is just as bad as creating a legacy of uncontested seats. I don't define "effective" as winning, but as running to win with all the time and preparation that requires. That means getting support from the state and national party. I have lived in the 2nd Congressional district in Indiana for eight years, or four elections. In that time, I saw two candidates who were completely unprepared to debate the other candidate (2018 and 2022). Indeed, when asked about national defense, the 2022 candidate started talking about having "a department of peace" instead of defense. There went the debate--and the Republican didn't even show up for that debate, so a major opportunity was lost. I'm not saying the candidate could have won, but we need candidates that people will remember, and candidates who are willing to build on a loss in order to win the next time, or to open the way for other candidates who can. That is part of the legacy that Beta O'Rourke has established in Texas.
How could I possibly disagree with what you said. However, I don’t live in your state I only live in my state. And I can feel somewhat protected because it’s a blue state. However again, that can all change from the top down, federal down. And I keep wondering where are all the young people, why is it all of us old people? I know there are young people who care but it’s their country going forward and they really need to get off their butts and do something.. Everybody says, oh well they’re busy with their jobs, tending their children. Well what are they going leave to their children if they don’t do something now? And I include members of my own family in this whole diatribe that I just let loose. And I don’t feel better for having said all that.
I'm retired, so like you, I can spend a lot of time reading from different sources. However, that does not answer the question of how we reach the general public who do not have the time or the resources to be on Substack. I subscribe to some Substacks (Public Notice, Public Information, Strength in Numbers, The Down Ballot) in order that the information that they provide for free will get out to those who seek it. However there is still the distribution issue.
Thank you for parsing this out, it's in keeping with what my personal thoughts have been, but the narrative tipped toward strictly authoritarian move by the WH despot. You're right about Stephen Colbert's prospects going forward.
Thanks! And yes. Based on today's reality, he'll be beyond fine. Of course we should fight to keep our democracy intact. But while many billionaires buckle, the rest of us don't have to. :) Here's the episode in which I discussed ABC's $15M payout : https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/media-money-mess
The alternative has problems too. Nobody is vetting the many people (and bots) who are writing opinions on various platforms. A skilled influencer can spread lies and bias too; it is not just the oligarchs. There is no perfect way to get news, and it is so easy for people to stay in their bubble and their comfort zone that they don't know the reasoned arguments by people who disagree with them.
Yup. People spread lies on their social channels and other platforms all the time. One thing I do is, with each episode, I send out newsletters that contain links for anyone who wants to see original sources. And I invite people to tell me if I missed anything. We need to separate ego from facts, and join together in pursuit of truth!
This is a very complex issue with no easy answers. We news junkies can sort out who to trust, but the average citizen has no clue how to go about it. Worse yet are the people who don’t want to think and want to be spoon fed. The politicos and podcasters who spiel nonsense disguised as fact are more than happy to oblige. Does anyone see a way out of this morass?
I haven't forgotten that Les Moonves, then the Chairman and CEO of CBS, was caught on video making comments during the 2016 US Presidential election campaign suggesting that Donald Trump's candidacy, while potentially negative for America, was beneficial for CBS's business. I have been grateful for a very long time for the many reputable alternative news sources outside mainstream corporate media. MediaBiasFactCheck.com helps me choose what news sources to rely upon for fair factual journalism.
Citizens can obtain news from a great variety of sources. Even those short on time can at least check the headlines and then read further if interested. I check AP, Reuters, NYT, WSJ, Bloomberg News, NPR, Contrarian, CSPAN, MSNBC, CNN, BBC, TOI, JTA, as well as local and national morning/evening telecast news.
Yes, but the major media are failing in the basics of their mission. None of them -- literally zero -- limit themselves to fact checked information. They have become what I call "open mic nights" for liars. Also, having spent 20 years inside mainstream media (on NPR and CNN) and writing columns for others, I know how similar they are. Mainstream media get dominant narratives that almost always echo each other. We need trustworthy sources of truth. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/its-time-to-end-news-open-mic-nights
Each person has to decide how to absorb the amalgam of information. Even your fact checking can be from a particular slant. Besides yourself, what other sources do you suggest?
Great question! Nope, those are claims, not facts.
A news network claims a person never said something; I go back and find the original video in which the person said it, and reports from the time in which that same news network reported that the person said it.
A newspaper claims a group has independent confirmation of an alleged incident; I check with the group and no, they don't.
It's far too kind to refer to the likes of CBS as "legacy media," considering that their legacy is helping to replace our constitutional republic with a fascist autocracy. I call them corporate media.
All of what you say is true. What you don't say is how one can afford to access all the different news sites one needs to form a well rounded picture. I am no longer satisfied from getting all my news from one or even a few sources.
Result: I spend most of my day reading different articles on different sites. If I wasn't retired, I couldn't do that, but since I am retired I can't afford to read all the sites I would like to. Talk about a Catch-22!
Excellent point! I know this answer will be ironic, but I have shown my paid subscribers a way to access most of the big news media for free, legally. I do have to establish a business model, so I don't give away money-saving content for free. On the plus side, I have kept my paid subscription rate almost as low as Substack allows. And subscribers tell me they're saving $ overall by following the steps I suggest.
So many big news agencies are failing the basics of fact checking. They don't deserve your hard earned -- and saved -- money!
P.S. Here it is: https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/a-free-legal-way-to-access-virtually
Exactly!!
I said the same thing on a different sub stack column. How we miss the days when we had the Washington Post in the New York Times to help us deal with the Vietnam war, Watergate, Pentagon papers etc. Back when they knew how to do real journalism. I blame the Internet!
That's even more true than you may realize! In Episode 43, I showed that the Post has been *literally* ignoring its own reporting from that same era (around Watergate days) when that reporting doesn't match its current desire to rewrite history. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/wapos-revisionist-history-on-munich
Thanks, I’ll take a look at that!
Think where we would be without the Internet today. There would be no alternate source of news, such as this one. There would be no free editorializing. There would be no easily reached sources of facts, rather than government garbled nonsense ("new numbers"). The Internet is responsible for many bad things, but I do not ever wish to be without it again.
There are no Edward R. Murrows, et al., on television and network news these days. It's all Corporatespeak, and sometimes Corporate scripted.
Oh I know that, don’t take my rant as something I really believe. When the Internet first became a “thing” I was working for a big company, and I thought it was fantastic, I said this would be wonderful people will have all the information they need to make good decisions. Hence my disappointment!
Pam, I know what you mean!
I blame the unlimited greed of the fascist billionaire/millionaire/CEO/shareholder class. The internet has made it worse in some, but better in other cases.
Yes, The Washington Post used to my US information source, the Guardian US edition and Der Spiegel my international sources to stay balanced. I also do remember reading about the Vietnam War, the Pentagon papers, Watergate, etc. in real time. Now I am old and often I think I wasn't born one minute too late. I wouldn't want to go through what those generations after us have to go through in a country so divided and so broken. All of this started in 2015, when the orange felon got 10 times more coverage than all other persons, including Biden during his administration, combined. Then, in 2021 the both-sideism started and no one newspaper has been reliable since then.
I actually blame the Democrats in Congress more than the fascists with what is happening now. The Democrats went along with far to many changes of the various laws to make all the greed and the American vulture capitalism possible. Now we see the result: a president who is a convicted felon and corrupt mob boss grifter, his fascist hangers-on everywhere in Congress, the McConnell/Roberts court and the totally ignorant voters and non-voters, who are ignorant also, otherwise they would vote.
For far too long Democrats have gone along to get along, which was used by the fascists to their advantage. There have been and there still are far too many elected positions on the local, state and federal level that are not even contested by the Democrats. Here in Arkansas there are numerous positions on the ballot where the only contestants are fascists or "libertarians." Not one Democrat. All of it is a crying shame.
Let’s support the new wave of Dems we are advocating no election should go uncontested, and are stepping up, common people who believe in values. Don’t give up on all the Democrats. There are plenty of good ones out there, we just have to look out for them and help them!
While I advocate letting no seat go uncontested, we have to run effective candidates. Dragging in people at the last minute (i.e.--after the primary), which happens in my home county in Indiana, and often in the state house elections, sets them and the Democratic party up for failure. Creating a legacy of failure is just as bad as creating a legacy of uncontested seats. I don't define "effective" as winning, but as running to win with all the time and preparation that requires. That means getting support from the state and national party. I have lived in the 2nd Congressional district in Indiana for eight years, or four elections. In that time, I saw two candidates who were completely unprepared to debate the other candidate (2018 and 2022). Indeed, when asked about national defense, the 2022 candidate started talking about having "a department of peace" instead of defense. There went the debate--and the Republican didn't even show up for that debate, so a major opportunity was lost. I'm not saying the candidate could have won, but we need candidates that people will remember, and candidates who are willing to build on a loss in order to win the next time, or to open the way for other candidates who can. That is part of the legacy that Beta O'Rourke has established in Texas.
How could I possibly disagree with what you said. However, I don’t live in your state I only live in my state. And I can feel somewhat protected because it’s a blue state. However again, that can all change from the top down, federal down. And I keep wondering where are all the young people, why is it all of us old people? I know there are young people who care but it’s their country going forward and they really need to get off their butts and do something.. Everybody says, oh well they’re busy with their jobs, tending their children. Well what are they going leave to their children if they don’t do something now? And I include members of my own family in this whole diatribe that I just let loose. And I don’t feel better for having said all that.
I'm retired, so like you, I can spend a lot of time reading from different sources. However, that does not answer the question of how we reach the general public who do not have the time or the resources to be on Substack. I subscribe to some Substacks (Public Notice, Public Information, Strength in Numbers, The Down Ballot) in order that the information that they provide for free will get out to those who seek it. However there is still the distribution issue.
Thank you for parsing this out, it's in keeping with what my personal thoughts have been, but the narrative tipped toward strictly authoritarian move by the WH despot. You're right about Stephen Colbert's prospects going forward.
Thanks! And yes. Based on today's reality, he'll be beyond fine. Of course we should fight to keep our democracy intact. But while many billionaires buckle, the rest of us don't have to. :) Here's the episode in which I discussed ABC's $15M payout : https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/media-money-mess
Thanks for running my latest piece, The Contrarian. More on all this over at theystandcorrected.substack.com , where you can also send me ideas!
The alternative has problems too. Nobody is vetting the many people (and bots) who are writing opinions on various platforms. A skilled influencer can spread lies and bias too; it is not just the oligarchs. There is no perfect way to get news, and it is so easy for people to stay in their bubble and their comfort zone that they don't know the reasoned arguments by people who disagree with them.
Yup. People spread lies on their social channels and other platforms all the time. One thing I do is, with each episode, I send out newsletters that contain links for anyone who wants to see original sources. And I invite people to tell me if I missed anything. We need to separate ego from facts, and join together in pursuit of truth!
This is a very complex issue with no easy answers. We news junkies can sort out who to trust, but the average citizen has no clue how to go about it. Worse yet are the people who don’t want to think and want to be spoon fed. The politicos and podcasters who spiel nonsense disguised as fact are more than happy to oblige. Does anyone see a way out of this morass?
I do. That's why They Stand Corrected exists! theystandcorrected.substack.com/
The work you is amazing.
Wow thanks!
Okays here’s another one to add to my stack of substacks. I enjoyed it and I’m gonna take a look at your site.
Great! Looking forward to meeting you over there. 👊🏻
Sheldon Whitehouse has been railing about this for years. I'll bet Ann and Ruth and Timothy would agree with you and say it is part of the plan.
I haven't forgotten that Les Moonves, then the Chairman and CEO of CBS, was caught on video making comments during the 2016 US Presidential election campaign suggesting that Donald Trump's candidacy, while potentially negative for America, was beneficial for CBS's business. I have been grateful for a very long time for the many reputable alternative news sources outside mainstream corporate media. MediaBiasFactCheck.com helps me choose what news sources to rely upon for fair factual journalism.
Yup. I've reported on Moonves and what it says about the media. https://contrarian.substack.com/p/the-medias-celebrity-obsession-is
Citizens can obtain news from a great variety of sources. Even those short on time can at least check the headlines and then read further if interested. I check AP, Reuters, NYT, WSJ, Bloomberg News, NPR, Contrarian, CSPAN, MSNBC, CNN, BBC, TOI, JTA, as well as local and national morning/evening telecast news.
Yes, but the major media are failing in the basics of their mission. None of them -- literally zero -- limit themselves to fact checked information. They have become what I call "open mic nights" for liars. Also, having spent 20 years inside mainstream media (on NPR and CNN) and writing columns for others, I know how similar they are. Mainstream media get dominant narratives that almost always echo each other. We need trustworthy sources of truth. https://theystandcorrected.substack.com/p/its-time-to-end-news-open-mic-nights
Each person has to decide how to absorb the amalgam of information. Even your fact checking can be from a particular slant. Besides yourself, what other sources do you suggest?
That's why I invite anyone to send me facts! Anything I missed, anything they think I should look at.
How do you decide you were sent facts? How do you fact check? Anyway you look at it, is there not some trust involved?
Great question! Nope, those are claims, not facts.
A news network claims a person never said something; I go back and find the original video in which the person said it, and reports from the time in which that same news network reported that the person said it.
A newspaper claims a group has independent confirmation of an alleged incident; I check with the group and no, they don't.
This stuff happens constantly.
Thanks for the clarification. Can you list a couple of recent confirmations, or lack of?
It's far too kind to refer to the likes of CBS as "legacy media," considering that their legacy is helping to replace our constitutional republic with a fascist autocracy. I call them corporate media.
I hope it is true, what you say. A ray of hope.
I sincerely hope all is true. If so, there is reason to hope.