I thought WaPo couldn't sink any lower on the editorial front. What an absolute disgrace.
In my "past life" covering Russian politics, I closely followed the demise of independent Russian media in the late Yeltsin/early Putin years. New bosses fired TV anchors, ordered changes in political coverage, and sometimes shut down news programs or even whole television networks. Some reporters and editors censored themselves to avoid losing their jobs.
I never thought I would see the same process play out at prominent news organizations in the U.S.
I was also alarmed to read Alan Greenblatt's account of pressure to avoid certain topics at Governing, a "wonky publication" about state and local governments:
How can we possibly expect any better from our major news outlets, Mark, when they are owned by individuals or corporations with larger financial interests? WaPo is a case in point.
It is essential, if our press is to fulfill its proper function, that we establish and promote outlets that are fully independent of outside pressures. The structure of The Guardian (which is owned and administered by an independent trust) is an appropriate template.
Trump, or as I prefer lately, Trumb (almost rhymes with dumb. I know, I know, but it makes me happy) is a lesson for future generations, and a test for us today. The lesson is how easily large numbers of people can be misled and then weaponized. Individuals are smart, but crowds are kind of dumb, apparently. This was hard learned in the 1930's and 40's, but collective memory seems to fade. Regardless, we are where we are because we assumed the guardrails of democracy were robust enough to contain a determined zealot. News Flash! : they're not.
Obviously, our test is how to respond. Do we have the collective wherewithal and determination to wrest back control of our fate and set society on a sustainable and hopefully less confrontational path? That ball is still up in the air I'd say. The decline of the News industry these last twenty five years or so, concurrent with the rise of the internet, has been difficult to watch. Now, seeing the exploitation of the loss of accepted understanding being used to nefarious political ends is maddening beyond belief.
A robust fourth estate is essential to a functioning free society. The internet and "the democratization of knowledge" knocked the financial legs out from under our press, and we are now reaping the result.
I'm just venting, and preaching to the choir I'm sure. But sometimes ya just gotta say it out loud.
I thought WaPo couldn't sink any lower on the editorial front. What an absolute disgrace.
In my "past life" covering Russian politics, I closely followed the demise of independent Russian media in the late Yeltsin/early Putin years. New bosses fired TV anchors, ordered changes in political coverage, and sometimes shut down news programs or even whole television networks. Some reporters and editors censored themselves to avoid losing their jobs.
I never thought I would see the same process play out at prominent news organizations in the U.S.
I was also alarmed to read Alan Greenblatt's account of pressure to avoid certain topics at Governing, a "wonky publication" about state and local governments:
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/10/22/alan-greenblatt-quit-governing-censorship-00617039
One side sees this as nothing. The other everything. You just can't report one side.
How can we possibly expect any better from our major news outlets, Mark, when they are owned by individuals or corporations with larger financial interests? WaPo is a case in point.
It is essential, if our press is to fulfill its proper function, that we establish and promote outlets that are fully independent of outside pressures. The structure of The Guardian (which is owned and administered by an independent trust) is an appropriate template.
Thanks as always for the truth
CNN, CBS, NBC and WaPo are dancing around with President Trump. That is why mainstream media is having an unusual amount of chaos.
Trump, or as I prefer lately, Trumb (almost rhymes with dumb. I know, I know, but it makes me happy) is a lesson for future generations, and a test for us today. The lesson is how easily large numbers of people can be misled and then weaponized. Individuals are smart, but crowds are kind of dumb, apparently. This was hard learned in the 1930's and 40's, but collective memory seems to fade. Regardless, we are where we are because we assumed the guardrails of democracy were robust enough to contain a determined zealot. News Flash! : they're not.
Obviously, our test is how to respond. Do we have the collective wherewithal and determination to wrest back control of our fate and set society on a sustainable and hopefully less confrontational path? That ball is still up in the air I'd say. The decline of the News industry these last twenty five years or so, concurrent with the rise of the internet, has been difficult to watch. Now, seeing the exploitation of the loss of accepted understanding being used to nefarious political ends is maddening beyond belief.
A robust fourth estate is essential to a functioning free society. The internet and "the democratization of knowledge" knocked the financial legs out from under our press, and we are now reaping the result.
I'm just venting, and preaching to the choir I'm sure. But sometimes ya just gotta say it out loud.
Stop The Presses, indeed. Lol