“How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through to the millions and millions of Americans all too willing to believe Trump’s lies?”
I think newspapers need to do two things: Publish stories on the front page every day reporting on the impacts of what’s happening on their communities. And not treating the lies as opinions. The second is publishing editorial opinions on the state of democracy on the front page. Not every day, but frequently enough.
I like "not treating the lies as opinions." Nearly always, things are either true or not true. Find out and tell us. And don't give house room to deniers of truth of any flavor except to point out they are lying.
I realize the pandemic unsettled "truth" for a bit until the science improved because humanity was experiencing something which we didn't understand. Yet. But in most matters, that's not the fact. There are facts.
Wrong! News is based on facts and facts are true, no matter what side of the fence you live on. A fact is not biased left or right. So, the news should be true, as far as the facts can be seen at the time of a reported article. As an example, an aircraft with 67 people aboard collided with a military helicopter over the Potomac River in late January. There were no survivors. These are facts, all true. The black boxes of both aircraft were retrieved. Facts - all true. Expressing a cause of the collision, at this point (before analysis of the data) would be opinion or speculation. When all facts are collected and analyzed, the factual cause will be reported.
Don't mix facts with opinions. Let's give an example. A journalist reports Trump says, "The election was rigged". It's a fact he made that statement. The idea "The election was rigged" is not a fact. It is an opinion.
The failure of the corporate media to call his lies what they were is a major reason we're in this situation. They spent years pussyfooting around playing the both sides game and now the NYT is locking the barn after the horses ass is out of the barn and living in the Whote House. That is precisely why I dropped my subscription to them and WaPo and only support The Guardian.
Margaret, thank you for the shout out to The Meidas Touch and the Current. I live in SE Georgia and subscribe to the Current and their excellent work. And I've recommended The Meidas Touch to dozens of people. Their daily political report by Ron Filipkowski is the best anywhere.
Agree - I watch (You Tube) and listen (podcasts) to all of the Meidas Touch Network shows as well as it's Legal AF channel which I highly recommend. There are a lot more pro-democracy shows out there and have been for years. People are just discovering them now. Thom Hartmann, David Pakman, TYT (The Young Turks) , The Daily Blast, Mary Trump Media, Fast Politics with Molly Jong Fast, Impolitic with John Heilman, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, The Bullwark (multiple shows), Pod Save America, Al Franken Podcast, The Warning with Steve Schmidt, Sisters in Law, The Rachel Maddow Show, The Jim Acosta Show, Deadline White House, The Damage Report, Democracy Now, On Democracy, Shrinking Trump, The Lincoln Project, Gaslit Nation, Rick Wilson's the Enemies List, Hacks on Tap, Politics War Room with James Carville and Al Hunt. That is just a fraction of them.
I’d add The Bulwark, even though they aren’t journalists in the traditional sense. They’ve built a community in their comments, and some days knowing that there are other people out there who see what is happening gives me the strength to carry on. I have also added Democracy Docket and Marc Elias to my list of the good ones.
Substack has many great contrarians including Jen Rubin and Norm Eisen. The one with the most followers is Heather Cox Richardson--by far. But Paul Krugman has done extremely well since leaving the NYTines. There are so many others as most of you are aware.
In 2016, Tony Schwartz, Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter “The Art of the Deal” tried to warns us about the true Donald Trump:
- “Lying is second nature to him,” Schwartz said. “More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true.”
- “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
- When Schwartz began writing “The Art of the Deal,” he realized that he needed to put an acceptable face on Trump’s loose relationship with the truth. So he concocted an artful euphemism. Writing in Trump’s voice, he explained to the reader, “I play to people’s fantasies. . . . People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration—and it’s a very effective form of promotion.” Schwartz now disavows the passage. “Deceit,” he told me, is never “innocent.” He added, “ ‘Truthful hyperbole’ is a contradiction in terms. It’s a way of saying, ‘It’s a lie, but who cares?’ ” Trump, he said, loved the phrase.
- “Of course he’s in it for the money,” he said. “One of the most deep and basic needs he has is to prove that ‘I’m richer than you.’ ” As for the idea that making deals is a form of poetry, Schwartz says, “He was incapable of saying something like that—it wouldn’t even be in his vocabulary.” He saw Trump as driven not by a pure love of dealmaking but by an insatiable hunger for “money, praise, and celebrity.” Often, after spending the day with Trump, and watching him pile one hugely expensive project atop the next, like a circus performer spinning plates, Schwartz would go home and tell his wife, “He’s a living black hole!”
- If Trump is elected President, he warned, “the millions of people who voted for him and believe that he represents their interests will learn what anyone who deals closely with him already knows—that he couldn’t care less about them.” ♦
July 25, 2016 Issue The New Yorker by Jane Mayer has been a New Yorker staff writer since 1995.
Trump's rise and the ensuing firestorm produced panic among many who were previously friendly or had worked with him. None of what Schwartz says should be swallowed wholesale.
Wonderful, uplifting piece, Ms. Sullivan! It behooves me to add a cautionary note: Part of the MO of Baker (as well as some others at the Times) is to--once in a blue moon--unburden himself of a thorough, truthful denunciation of Trump and MAGA and immediately return to his customary sane-washing and both-siderism. It's as if he is saying: "There, libs. I said it. Now you can't criticize me anymore!" I hope I'm wrong this time, but if past is prolog.....
Could the 40 news organizations that support the AP agree to preface their questions to President Trump qnd his press secretary this way? "On behalf of the Associated Press, I'd like to ask . . . ?"
In other words, could the press make the AP part of every press conference till a court reinstates the AP?
Or accepting illegal activities as something the executive branch can do.
DOGE is either a new name for the department that handles US Government websites (in which case it has NO authority over other agencies) or it is an agency set over all branches of government which has no basis in the law.
The Department of Education was created by Congress. It's budget is approved by Congress.
If he wants to get rid of the Department of Education, Republicans in Congress will have to do it.
They have the majority. Why isn't he asking Congress to do it?
Instead of allowing an illegal immigrant to blow holes in our system?
Ive been saying that from day one. So sick of his posts and bs just reverberating through all media. Its the single thing that made me turn away (november 6)
I think an important, often overlooked, reason why so many people get sucked into the Fox hole is because it is part of the "basic" cable TV package. We only have Comcast where I live and you have to pay for a "premium" plan above and beyond the "basic" plan in order to get CNN and MSNBC. So budget conscious viewers never even see MSNBC or CNN. Also I noticed on our Samsung Smart TV Fox seems to be given a more prominent place and you cannot block it. If you select "live" tv or "news" it defaults to Fox and you cannot even find MSNBC and must dig to around to find NBC. So I think Fox pays extra to cable providers and streaming services to be more visible. Also - don't forget Sinclair Broadcasting (right wing MAGA loving) owns a good swath of local TV stations around the country.
The skew in what is offered “low information voters” is enormous, from public settings where only FOX plays to cable companies putting FOX first. We can’t change that but billboards are not that expensive to make the big point. There’s a nice Bulwark podcast interviewing Adam Kitzinger on Youtube that makes clear he was a Tea Party congressman who didn’t roll over for Trump lies and I sent that to my MAGA sibs (whose ability to read is probably stuck at about 6th grade level but who listen to youtube all the time). Maybe they’ll listen. Key reminder is reading level is probably low among many MAGAmaniacs. Part of their resentment is how schools failed them. They don’t see the connection between cutting school budgets, focusing on test scores rather than love of learning, and hating school. We can’t improve education in this country without changing the politics of education.
I live in “the reddest state in the union,” according to a former governor, and I wish I had a clue about how to bridge the information divide. I see someone suggesting newspapers do more. As much as I’d love to see that, I sadly doubt it would have much impact. Most people no longer read newspapers — especially those people who strongly support Trump. They’re fine with living in a bubble where everyone looks/acts/believes just like they do. As long as Fox, OAN, their churches and social media/circles keep that bubble going, they won’t question anything or seek independent information. In my state, raising questions is absolutely frowned upon.
But you think differently, so others do too. Small acts of resistance, done publicly, encourage other like-minded people to speak out. Calling out lies opens the door a crack. Courage!
I can — and do — find other sources without any problem. But those who follow Trump blindly don’t WANT another source. Anything they disagree with is “fake news.”
That the NYT discovered a three letter word after nine years of curlicued evasion and euphemism is a darkly amusing indication of how deeply we’ve descended into dictatorship.
Otherwise, the NYT’s editors have been fascist-curious. Three recent things they’ve done off the top of my head:
1. Characterized Trump’s assertion of dictatorial power as a King as something like “a taste for the trappings of royalty” and accompanied it with a flattering picture of him in a church with a flag;
2. Called the Joint Chiefs “Trump’s generals”;
3. Published Peter Baker’s sociopathically ironical reveries about annexing Canada. Baker is the kind of empty vessel who “goes Nazi”.
That, indeed, remains the big, underreported story at the NYT and Washington Post—that Musk and the people around him are Nazis. Editors have made a conscious decision to suppress this—they want to accommodate power, but how could they accommodate outright Nazis? It would puncture the fugue state air of normality they’re so desperate to sustain. Get on them about that, Ms. Sullivan—calling them Nazis might move the needle of public opinion.
A depressing illustration of this was in an Aaron Blake piece in the Post yesterday. He professed befuddlement about whether that was a sieg heil Musk made and chalked it up to “trolling”; it went without saying it couldn’t have anything to do with actual ideology and practice. Likewise, Dan Balz, who always manages to make pink slime out of the visceral, flesh and blood matters of politics, said that Trump’s assertion that he is a King shows that he wants to be “king of the hill”. He did get a little warmer when he said, “He wants to dictate events and control everything.” Almost there, Dan!
I can’t make this shit up.
In sum, the cult of journalistic “objectivity” demands two things when addressing Nazis’ possession of our government:
1. Disbelieve your own eyes;
2. Never invoke or recall history.
One must apprehend reality as a child or a Martian might. To quote Fawlty Towers: “Don’t talk about the war!” Or, in a similar Monty Python vein: treat Mr. “Hilter’s” candidacy as something entirely normal.
I am seeing clips on social media of Dems appearing on Fox more often telling viewers exactly what’s going on. I think they need more of that. Go to where they are putting their attention. I think billboards in the reddest rural areas saying things like “the richest man in the world is taking money away from the poorest children in the world!”
When someone asks you how you are doing, don’t just say “I’m fine”. Say, I’m very worried about the people losing their jobs, the grant money being shut down for medical research….”
So much depends on our attitude. We need to stay mentally strong. We can defeat these people with persistence, cleverness and outrageousness. I love the street protests. Capture these on your phone. Share them far and wide. Tell people about Meidas Touch, Substack writers, Bluesky and any other non-legacy media entities.
Word of mouth, small actions and a strong spirit is invaluable. Look at the French Resistance in WW2.
I would like media companies to rehire the editors who’s job it was to listen to readers and filter that feedback back into the org.
The media fell for its own hubris — more humility and straight talk, with a stronger backbone from owners and editors in chief who seem to have very delicate feelings and egos. Perhaps hire more women and minorities who are less fragile and emotional?
Thank you for continuing to shine a light on the ways the press is (or should be) coverig this regime. You ask, "How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through to the millions and millions of Americans all too willing to believe Trump’s lies?" and whether it is the press's or education's role to do that.
IMHO, that is not an either-or proposition. The press must continue to try to reach through--in print, online and, especially in social media. (As you point out, news coverage in many places is spotty to nil, and to the extent that people actually read or watch news anymore, it is not even soundbites that grab their attention, but headlines. Learn to play the "grab 'em by the eyeballs" game).
Education, to the extent that local institutions, lawyers, lawmakers (who are not cowed), and companies. For example, I was talking to a friend yesterday who is a senior executive at a very large, Fortune 50 company where they have responsibility over tariffs, trade, food safety and regulation, etc. They were worried about the spread of avian flu left unchecked by a weakened FDA. Or the possible rise of a new pandemic among workers and supply chain. Or the farmers and small manufacturers that can no longer source parts or find reliable labor. Or lower standards for clean water and air. And all the inflationary implications this augurs.
While they obviously cannot express their concerns publicly, that conversation opened my eyes to the need to let people know the ways even corporate entities (and even corporations that have gone over to the dark side) have over food supply, health and safety.
And schools and colleges should also be doing their part in whatever ways they can. These must not be limited to local efforts, but must reach in there--where the local source in a community is also your neighbor, your kids' teacher, or the librarian. People are more likely to trust people they know and who live in the community.
Which gets to my first and foremost: there must be more personal outreach. Talk to family and friends. Share stories of how people close to you are being impacted. Don't couch it in red vs. blue. Or black and white. These are not two-sides stories.
To answer your question: "How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through...Is it the responsibility of the media to do this, or is it the role of education? Or something else?"
I just discovered an essay by an Appalachian, Coyote Wallace: "Hungry Like Me: The False Prophets Of Poverty." Their argument is that many Appalachians don't trust the media because it has unfairly portrayed their region and their culture, and that many Appalachians likewise don't trust rich people from out of town because those outsiders tend to be grifters who take advantage of poor people's desperation. Further, that many Appalachians "believe the left is doing to him [Trump] what they perceive to have been done to themselves," so they identify with Trump, and anyone calling Trump a liar is assumed to be the bad guy. Lastly, that Trump promises to bring back their previous way of life and help them earn a living, which is an attractive promise. Hence, a messenger "simply telling the truth" about Trump is not going to change the mind of someone who doesn't trust the messenger. Obviously this is a generalization, and the author, Coyote Wallace, is an example of a non-Trump-supporting Appalachian. But the takeaway, I think, is that regardless of whether a media organization believes it has a responsibility to educate about a topic, some people may choose not to listen to anything it has to say and, to the extent that they do happen to hear it, may consistently choose to believe the opposite. Messaging often has to come from within a community to be effective in that community. "Insider voice" gets heard, and "outsider voice" doesn't. https://medium.com/@kidether/hungry-like-me-the-false-prophets-of-poverty-595dc4d1074a
Relatedly: Jared Yates Sexton is an author/podcaster who grew up in southern Indiana and reflects on the cultural attitudes there, regarding the current national politics. As for messaging, he points out that the Democrats won't save us and everyone knows it, so it's important to emphasize how the oligarchs are hurting all of us. The distrust of "rich elites" is often pointed at the Democratic Party, which is fair criticism, but that same distrust also really needs to be pointed at Elon Musk.
I think one of the first strategies needs to involve finding the right messengers to whom people will listen. If someone will never listen to such-and-such media outlet or will (on principle) do the opposite of whatever it says, then the media outlet is wasting its time if they're still trying to reach that particular person, sadly. But someone else could reach that person.
A version of this happened to me the other day. I (a trans person) reviewed a book that covers the history of the anti-trans movement. Someone left a two-sentence comment on my book review, alleging that the majority of Americans have "rejected" trans people and so it's time for trans people to "self-reflect," i.e., to have a thought for the first time in our lives and to conclude that we oughtn't be trans. (This is obviously hostile nonsense.) I responded briefly saying that, in addition to my lived experience as someone whose gender transition was 27 years ago, I've read many books and written a few of my own, so I do in fact self-reflect. (What the heck was my book review they were responding to, if not an example of my reading and reflection?) And they responded, oh, well, your problem is evidently that you think TOO MUCH and thus you've caused yourself to become myopic and you should try living in the real world. (In what world do I live— ?) This is a version of the problem that affects trans people in particular right now, as well as people of other marginalized identities: we aren't trusted *because of who we are*, which is part of what it means for our identities to be marginalized. People marginalize our voices by not listening to us. I can say to myself: As someone who studied philosophy and journalism, I have a responsibility to put my learning and skills to good use and to speak up about this or that. But there will always be someone who will pointedly ignore me because allegedly I am *not thinking at all and also am thinking too much,* i.e., they tell me to shut up because I am trans and therefore all my ideas are invalid and baked raw and burnt in the underthinking/overthinking oven. That person won't be listening to what I have to say about politics generally either. And by association with the fact of my existence, any newspaper that acknowledges that trans people exist, are humans, and should have basic rights (never mind that we might be hirable writers for the newspaper) is going to draw the "la-la-la I'm not listening" fingers-in-ears treatment from a large segment of the population, and unfortunately I don't know what the newspaper can do about that.
In answering your question……I think that both media and education play a role in setting the record straight. Education can give us a foundation and help us learn how to evaluate in a critical way. Some people are just not interested in education in that regard. So, media should step in and set the record straight. Coalition building between entities that are grounded in truth, critical thinking, evidence based information, would make a stronger front than a bunch of them individually trying to move us in the direction of truth and democracy.
I believe an important long term course correction is to reintroduce civics education, where it has been dropped from the curriculum, or strengthen it where it exists so that young people understand why representative democracy is such an amazing but fragile institution that requires everyone to understand our rights and responsibilities as citizens. The Close Up Foundation can play a role in school districts that have eliminated civics education. I worked for them 30 years ago and they are still going strong.
“How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through to the millions and millions of Americans all too willing to believe Trump’s lies?”
I think newspapers need to do two things: Publish stories on the front page every day reporting on the impacts of what’s happening on their communities. And not treating the lies as opinions. The second is publishing editorial opinions on the state of democracy on the front page. Not every day, but frequently enough.
I like "not treating the lies as opinions." Nearly always, things are either true or not true. Find out and tell us. And don't give house room to deniers of truth of any flavor except to point out they are lying.
I realize the pandemic unsettled "truth" for a bit until the science improved because humanity was experiencing something which we didn't understand. Yet. But in most matters, that's not the fact. There are facts.
The news is not true or false. It's just the news, and it's up to us to make that call.
Wrong! News is based on facts and facts are true, no matter what side of the fence you live on. A fact is not biased left or right. So, the news should be true, as far as the facts can be seen at the time of a reported article. As an example, an aircraft with 67 people aboard collided with a military helicopter over the Potomac River in late January. There were no survivors. These are facts, all true. The black boxes of both aircraft were retrieved. Facts - all true. Expressing a cause of the collision, at this point (before analysis of the data) would be opinion or speculation. When all facts are collected and analyzed, the factual cause will be reported.
Don't mix facts with opinions. Let's give an example. A journalist reports Trump says, "The election was rigged". It's a fact he made that statement. The idea "The election was rigged" is not a fact. It is an opinion.
The failure of the corporate media to call his lies what they were is a major reason we're in this situation. They spent years pussyfooting around playing the both sides game and now the NYT is locking the barn after the horses ass is out of the barn and living in the Whote House. That is precisely why I dropped my subscription to them and WaPo and only support The Guardian.
Margaret, thank you for the shout out to The Meidas Touch and the Current. I live in SE Georgia and subscribe to the Current and their excellent work. And I've recommended The Meidas Touch to dozens of people. Their daily political report by Ron Filipkowski is the best anywhere.
Agree - I watch (You Tube) and listen (podcasts) to all of the Meidas Touch Network shows as well as it's Legal AF channel which I highly recommend. There are a lot more pro-democracy shows out there and have been for years. People are just discovering them now. Thom Hartmann, David Pakman, TYT (The Young Turks) , The Daily Blast, Mary Trump Media, Fast Politics with Molly Jong Fast, Impolitic with John Heilman, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, The Bullwark (multiple shows), Pod Save America, Al Franken Podcast, The Warning with Steve Schmidt, Sisters in Law, The Rachel Maddow Show, The Jim Acosta Show, Deadline White House, The Damage Report, Democracy Now, On Democracy, Shrinking Trump, The Lincoln Project, Gaslit Nation, Rick Wilson's the Enemies List, Hacks on Tap, Politics War Room with James Carville and Al Hunt. That is just a fraction of them.
Consider adding Contrarian on substack. Substacks lives and podcasts
I’d add The Bulwark, even though they aren’t journalists in the traditional sense. They’ve built a community in their comments, and some days knowing that there are other people out there who see what is happening gives me the strength to carry on. I have also added Democracy Docket and Marc Elias to my list of the good ones.
Substack has many great contrarians including Jen Rubin and Norm Eisen. The one with the most followers is Heather Cox Richardson--by far. But Paul Krugman has done extremely well since leaving the NYTines. There are so many others as most of you are aware.
In 2016, Tony Schwartz, Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter “The Art of the Deal” tried to warns us about the true Donald Trump:
- “Lying is second nature to him,” Schwartz said. “More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true.”
- “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
- When Schwartz began writing “The Art of the Deal,” he realized that he needed to put an acceptable face on Trump’s loose relationship with the truth. So he concocted an artful euphemism. Writing in Trump’s voice, he explained to the reader, “I play to people’s fantasies. . . . People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration—and it’s a very effective form of promotion.” Schwartz now disavows the passage. “Deceit,” he told me, is never “innocent.” He added, “ ‘Truthful hyperbole’ is a contradiction in terms. It’s a way of saying, ‘It’s a lie, but who cares?’ ” Trump, he said, loved the phrase.
- “Of course he’s in it for the money,” he said. “One of the most deep and basic needs he has is to prove that ‘I’m richer than you.’ ” As for the idea that making deals is a form of poetry, Schwartz says, “He was incapable of saying something like that—it wouldn’t even be in his vocabulary.” He saw Trump as driven not by a pure love of dealmaking but by an insatiable hunger for “money, praise, and celebrity.” Often, after spending the day with Trump, and watching him pile one hugely expensive project atop the next, like a circus performer spinning plates, Schwartz would go home and tell his wife, “He’s a living black hole!”
- If Trump is elected President, he warned, “the millions of people who voted for him and believe that he represents their interests will learn what anyone who deals closely with him already knows—that he couldn’t care less about them.” ♦
July 25, 2016 Issue The New Yorker by Jane Mayer has been a New Yorker staff writer since 1995.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
Arghhhh.... So chilling to read again almost 10 years later.... the brilliant Jane Mayer.
Trump's rise and the ensuing firestorm produced panic among many who were previously friendly or had worked with him. None of what Schwartz says should be swallowed wholesale.
Wonderful, uplifting piece, Ms. Sullivan! It behooves me to add a cautionary note: Part of the MO of Baker (as well as some others at the Times) is to--once in a blue moon--unburden himself of a thorough, truthful denunciation of Trump and MAGA and immediately return to his customary sane-washing and both-siderism. It's as if he is saying: "There, libs. I said it. Now you can't criticize me anymore!" I hope I'm wrong this time, but if past is prolog.....
Could the 40 news organizations that support the AP agree to preface their questions to President Trump qnd his press secretary this way? "On behalf of the Associated Press, I'd like to ask . . . ?"
In other words, could the press make the AP part of every press conference till a court reinstates the AP?
While you’re at it, let’s change the media’s habit of repeating all Trump’s talking points, and saying nothing of the Dems counterpoints.
Or accepting illegal activities as something the executive branch can do.
DOGE is either a new name for the department that handles US Government websites (in which case it has NO authority over other agencies) or it is an agency set over all branches of government which has no basis in the law.
The Department of Education was created by Congress. It's budget is approved by Congress.
If he wants to get rid of the Department of Education, Republicans in Congress will have to do it.
They have the majority. Why isn't he asking Congress to do it?
Instead of allowing an illegal immigrant to blow holes in our system?
ABSO-BLUMING-LUTELY. And the Dems themselves need to be more active in providing those counterpoints.
YES!!!!!!!!
Ive been saying that from day one. So sick of his posts and bs just reverberating through all media. Its the single thing that made me turn away (november 6)
I think an important, often overlooked, reason why so many people get sucked into the Fox hole is because it is part of the "basic" cable TV package. We only have Comcast where I live and you have to pay for a "premium" plan above and beyond the "basic" plan in order to get CNN and MSNBC. So budget conscious viewers never even see MSNBC or CNN. Also I noticed on our Samsung Smart TV Fox seems to be given a more prominent place and you cannot block it. If you select "live" tv or "news" it defaults to Fox and you cannot even find MSNBC and must dig to around to find NBC. So I think Fox pays extra to cable providers and streaming services to be more visible. Also - don't forget Sinclair Broadcasting (right wing MAGA loving) owns a good swath of local TV stations around the country.
The skew in what is offered “low information voters” is enormous, from public settings where only FOX plays to cable companies putting FOX first. We can’t change that but billboards are not that expensive to make the big point. There’s a nice Bulwark podcast interviewing Adam Kitzinger on Youtube that makes clear he was a Tea Party congressman who didn’t roll over for Trump lies and I sent that to my MAGA sibs (whose ability to read is probably stuck at about 6th grade level but who listen to youtube all the time). Maybe they’ll listen. Key reminder is reading level is probably low among many MAGAmaniacs. Part of their resentment is how schools failed them. They don’t see the connection between cutting school budgets, focusing on test scores rather than love of learning, and hating school. We can’t improve education in this country without changing the politics of education.
—Nailed it! Why I quit Comcast.
I live in “the reddest state in the union,” according to a former governor, and I wish I had a clue about how to bridge the information divide. I see someone suggesting newspapers do more. As much as I’d love to see that, I sadly doubt it would have much impact. Most people no longer read newspapers — especially those people who strongly support Trump. They’re fine with living in a bubble where everyone looks/acts/believes just like they do. As long as Fox, OAN, their churches and social media/circles keep that bubble going, they won’t question anything or seek independent information. In my state, raising questions is absolutely frowned upon.
But you think differently, so others do too. Small acts of resistance, done publicly, encourage other like-minded people to speak out. Calling out lies opens the door a crack. Courage!
Look up your state here: https://statesnewsroom.com/ You should be able to find some sources.
I can — and do — find other sources without any problem. But those who follow Trump blindly don’t WANT another source. Anything they disagree with is “fake news.”
All too true, I too sadly know firsthand, but there must somehow be another option offered to these 'most people'.
Ms. Sullivan,
That the NYT discovered a three letter word after nine years of curlicued evasion and euphemism is a darkly amusing indication of how deeply we’ve descended into dictatorship.
Otherwise, the NYT’s editors have been fascist-curious. Three recent things they’ve done off the top of my head:
1. Characterized Trump’s assertion of dictatorial power as a King as something like “a taste for the trappings of royalty” and accompanied it with a flattering picture of him in a church with a flag;
2. Called the Joint Chiefs “Trump’s generals”;
3. Published Peter Baker’s sociopathically ironical reveries about annexing Canada. Baker is the kind of empty vessel who “goes Nazi”.
That, indeed, remains the big, underreported story at the NYT and Washington Post—that Musk and the people around him are Nazis. Editors have made a conscious decision to suppress this—they want to accommodate power, but how could they accommodate outright Nazis? It would puncture the fugue state air of normality they’re so desperate to sustain. Get on them about that, Ms. Sullivan—calling them Nazis might move the needle of public opinion.
A depressing illustration of this was in an Aaron Blake piece in the Post yesterday. He professed befuddlement about whether that was a sieg heil Musk made and chalked it up to “trolling”; it went without saying it couldn’t have anything to do with actual ideology and practice. Likewise, Dan Balz, who always manages to make pink slime out of the visceral, flesh and blood matters of politics, said that Trump’s assertion that he is a King shows that he wants to be “king of the hill”. He did get a little warmer when he said, “He wants to dictate events and control everything.” Almost there, Dan!
I can’t make this shit up.
In sum, the cult of journalistic “objectivity” demands two things when addressing Nazis’ possession of our government:
1. Disbelieve your own eyes;
2. Never invoke or recall history.
One must apprehend reality as a child or a Martian might. To quote Fawlty Towers: “Don’t talk about the war!” Or, in a similar Monty Python vein: treat Mr. “Hilter’s” candidacy as something entirely normal.
I am seeing clips on social media of Dems appearing on Fox more often telling viewers exactly what’s going on. I think they need more of that. Go to where they are putting their attention. I think billboards in the reddest rural areas saying things like “the richest man in the world is taking money away from the poorest children in the world!”
Yes, no act is too small (—AOC). Open the door for others of like mind to speak by speaking out in whatever way you can.
When someone asks you how you are doing, don’t just say “I’m fine”. Say, I’m very worried about the people losing their jobs, the grant money being shut down for medical research….”
So much depends on our attitude. We need to stay mentally strong. We can defeat these people with persistence, cleverness and outrageousness. I love the street protests. Capture these on your phone. Share them far and wide. Tell people about Meidas Touch, Substack writers, Bluesky and any other non-legacy media entities.
Word of mouth, small actions and a strong spirit is invaluable. Look at the French Resistance in WW2.
I would like media companies to rehire the editors who’s job it was to listen to readers and filter that feedback back into the org.
The media fell for its own hubris — more humility and straight talk, with a stronger backbone from owners and editors in chief who seem to have very delicate feelings and egos. Perhaps hire more women and minorities who are less fragile and emotional?
Thank you for continuing to shine a light on the ways the press is (or should be) coverig this regime. You ask, "How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through to the millions and millions of Americans all too willing to believe Trump’s lies?" and whether it is the press's or education's role to do that.
IMHO, that is not an either-or proposition. The press must continue to try to reach through--in print, online and, especially in social media. (As you point out, news coverage in many places is spotty to nil, and to the extent that people actually read or watch news anymore, it is not even soundbites that grab their attention, but headlines. Learn to play the "grab 'em by the eyeballs" game).
Education, to the extent that local institutions, lawyers, lawmakers (who are not cowed), and companies. For example, I was talking to a friend yesterday who is a senior executive at a very large, Fortune 50 company where they have responsibility over tariffs, trade, food safety and regulation, etc. They were worried about the spread of avian flu left unchecked by a weakened FDA. Or the possible rise of a new pandemic among workers and supply chain. Or the farmers and small manufacturers that can no longer source parts or find reliable labor. Or lower standards for clean water and air. And all the inflationary implications this augurs.
While they obviously cannot express their concerns publicly, that conversation opened my eyes to the need to let people know the ways even corporate entities (and even corporations that have gone over to the dark side) have over food supply, health and safety.
And schools and colleges should also be doing their part in whatever ways they can. These must not be limited to local efforts, but must reach in there--where the local source in a community is also your neighbor, your kids' teacher, or the librarian. People are more likely to trust people they know and who live in the community.
Which gets to my first and foremost: there must be more personal outreach. Talk to family and friends. Share stories of how people close to you are being impacted. Don't couch it in red vs. blue. Or black and white. These are not two-sides stories.
Just my two cents here...
Thanks; this is perceptive and wise!
Thank you. Appreciate all you do to get the word out about press coverage, Margaret. Need to spread the net much, much wider.
To answer your question: "How can the reality-based press, as I call it, get through...Is it the responsibility of the media to do this, or is it the role of education? Or something else?"
I just discovered an essay by an Appalachian, Coyote Wallace: "Hungry Like Me: The False Prophets Of Poverty." Their argument is that many Appalachians don't trust the media because it has unfairly portrayed their region and their culture, and that many Appalachians likewise don't trust rich people from out of town because those outsiders tend to be grifters who take advantage of poor people's desperation. Further, that many Appalachians "believe the left is doing to him [Trump] what they perceive to have been done to themselves," so they identify with Trump, and anyone calling Trump a liar is assumed to be the bad guy. Lastly, that Trump promises to bring back their previous way of life and help them earn a living, which is an attractive promise. Hence, a messenger "simply telling the truth" about Trump is not going to change the mind of someone who doesn't trust the messenger. Obviously this is a generalization, and the author, Coyote Wallace, is an example of a non-Trump-supporting Appalachian. But the takeaway, I think, is that regardless of whether a media organization believes it has a responsibility to educate about a topic, some people may choose not to listen to anything it has to say and, to the extent that they do happen to hear it, may consistently choose to believe the opposite. Messaging often has to come from within a community to be effective in that community. "Insider voice" gets heard, and "outsider voice" doesn't. https://medium.com/@kidether/hungry-like-me-the-false-prophets-of-poverty-595dc4d1074a
Relatedly: Jared Yates Sexton is an author/podcaster who grew up in southern Indiana and reflects on the cultural attitudes there, regarding the current national politics. As for messaging, he points out that the Democrats won't save us and everyone knows it, so it's important to emphasize how the oligarchs are hurting all of us. The distrust of "rich elites" is often pointed at the Democratic Party, which is fair criticism, but that same distrust also really needs to be pointed at Elon Musk.
I think one of the first strategies needs to involve finding the right messengers to whom people will listen. If someone will never listen to such-and-such media outlet or will (on principle) do the opposite of whatever it says, then the media outlet is wasting its time if they're still trying to reach that particular person, sadly. But someone else could reach that person.
A version of this happened to me the other day. I (a trans person) reviewed a book that covers the history of the anti-trans movement. Someone left a two-sentence comment on my book review, alleging that the majority of Americans have "rejected" trans people and so it's time for trans people to "self-reflect," i.e., to have a thought for the first time in our lives and to conclude that we oughtn't be trans. (This is obviously hostile nonsense.) I responded briefly saying that, in addition to my lived experience as someone whose gender transition was 27 years ago, I've read many books and written a few of my own, so I do in fact self-reflect. (What the heck was my book review they were responding to, if not an example of my reading and reflection?) And they responded, oh, well, your problem is evidently that you think TOO MUCH and thus you've caused yourself to become myopic and you should try living in the real world. (In what world do I live— ?) This is a version of the problem that affects trans people in particular right now, as well as people of other marginalized identities: we aren't trusted *because of who we are*, which is part of what it means for our identities to be marginalized. People marginalize our voices by not listening to us. I can say to myself: As someone who studied philosophy and journalism, I have a responsibility to put my learning and skills to good use and to speak up about this or that. But there will always be someone who will pointedly ignore me because allegedly I am *not thinking at all and also am thinking too much,* i.e., they tell me to shut up because I am trans and therefore all my ideas are invalid and baked raw and burnt in the underthinking/overthinking oven. That person won't be listening to what I have to say about politics generally either. And by association with the fact of my existence, any newspaper that acknowledges that trans people exist, are humans, and should have basic rights (never mind that we might be hirable writers for the newspaper) is going to draw the "la-la-la I'm not listening" fingers-in-ears treatment from a large segment of the population, and unfortunately I don't know what the newspaper can do about that.
Thank you!
In answering your question……I think that both media and education play a role in setting the record straight. Education can give us a foundation and help us learn how to evaluate in a critical way. Some people are just not interested in education in that regard. So, media should step in and set the record straight. Coalition building between entities that are grounded in truth, critical thinking, evidence based information, would make a stronger front than a bunch of them individually trying to move us in the direction of truth and democracy.
I believe an important long term course correction is to reintroduce civics education, where it has been dropped from the curriculum, or strengthen it where it exists so that young people understand why representative democracy is such an amazing but fragile institution that requires everyone to understand our rights and responsibilities as citizens. The Close Up Foundation can play a role in school districts that have eliminated civics education. I worked for them 30 years ago and they are still going strong.
https://www.closeup.org/?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAqwOhq3Vfefew4-CGqsJRVlhY1lq4&gclid=CjwKCAiAzvC9BhADEiwAEhtlN4Pgo0semsNJDy1e2GjOjRVND_1Tfsy0625jR7-XpGVy2st2pAD-bRoCRMoQAvD_BwE
Thanks, if only…