Matt Taibbi on the news business and how it drives division
Here’s a video of a very interesting talk by Matt Taibbi on the way that money drives news decisions that help polarize America further. I think it’s worth listening to, although I think he leaves out a lot, as well.
Taibbi is an unusual journalist – sort of on the left but a maverick who’s not afraid to call out the left and do a lot of critiquing of the press, as well. But here he seems to be ignoring some non-financial causes of the changes in news coverage, such as: (1) the erasure of the difference between opinion and fact journalism that started with Vietnam and does not appear to have been money-driven (2) the effect Watergate had on reporters’ egos and goals (3) the imbalance between the number of news outlets on the left and on the right, which is enormously skewed towards the left (4) the fact that the news is not just partisan on each side in terms of what topics they cover and how, but that – particularly on the left – a significant amount of their coverage consists of lies and/or substantial distortions (often featuring truncated quotes).
Here it is:
There is an especially revealing exchange that starts around minute 57:05. Taibbi’s monologue is over, and there is an interviewer asking him questions about covering the news. She says [emphasis mine]:
First there is the notion of treating both sides as equal, when they’re not. So, for example, I think it’s fairly clear that. you know, Donald Trump is prone to xenophobia, white nationalism, these types of things, so – you know, how do you kind of put that in context? Or, you know, how do you think about that, you know, covering him when there’s this – you have a chicken/egg problem with how you present his views?
So, in the context of being objective, she accepts (and expects Taibbi and every other supposedly neutral observer) to accept, that Trump is “xenophobic” and a “white nationalist.” Basically, she is saying that since it’s obviously true that Trump is an evil racist white supremacist who’s afraid of foreigners, is it okay to be fair to him, and what would “objectivity” even mean when covering a person such as that?
My answer would be to point out that she’s already made assumptions and believes her assumptions to be true, and might need to really dive deep, read some discussions on the right about those issues regarding Trump, and challenge herself and her assumptions. For example, I’ve written here about the use of the word “xenophobia” to label the right as evil, and why it’s just a buzzword that sometimes describes very logical reasoning and not a phobia at all. In addition, of course someone who is against illegal immigration would appeal to people who really are white supremacists, but that does not mean that person supports white supremacy nor that he/she has chosen such a position in order to appeal to white supremacists. There are enormous independent reasons to oppose illegal immigration, and by labeling the person “racist” “xenophobe” “white supremacist” or by pointing out that the person’s point of view happens to be attractive to such people is to use propagandist labels to deflect a serious discussion that we should be having about the merits of the case for opposing illegal immigration.
Taibbi says something curious during his answer to this particular question. He points out that during the 2016 campaign it was considered okay for reporters such as him to talk about the fact that Trump wasn’t just appealing to racists, but was also appealing to the disaffected Americans who felt they’d been left behind by government. Taibbi says that, after the election, that was no longer allowed (by the people who run the media outlets, I suppose), and that suddenly all that was considered acceptable by management was to say that Trump won by appealing to racists. Taibbi makes it clear that he thinks this appeal of Trump’s to the disaffected was insincere on Trump’s part; that of course he didn’t and doesn’t care about those people, but that still it needed to be reported that he was marketing his campaign towards them. In other words, Taibbi believes that he can read Trump’s mind, and that one of Trump’s most consistent messages is completely cynical and manipulative.
The sad thing is that Taibbi is one of the more objective reporters in the MSM.
There do exist a few leftists who are bold and independent (I would include Aaron Mate, Michael Tracey, and Glenn Greenwald, in addition to Taibbi); although all are hostile to Trump in particular, and to the right in general, they have the virtue of being skeptical of most of the relentless propaganda of the MSM; similarly, the most devastating deconstruction of the insanity of “woke” SJW ideology comes from James Lindsay and Helen Pluckrose, co-authors of Cynical Theories.
The interviewer thinks Trump suffers from xenophobia; I think she suffers from oikiphobia.
Taibbi is worth reading for his commentary on the left, but I think his opposition to Russia, Russia, Russia was, like Greenwald’s, because of his love for Russia, not for Trump. He also recognizes that the modern left is dominated by the elites, not the proletariat.
The interviewer is one of those people who thought everything was JUST FINE the morning of Election Day 2016 and thinks getting rid of Trump will make things go back to being JUST FINE.
Taibbi, Greenwald, and others on the Left who genuinely understood things were not JUST FINE (though I might differ with their diagnosis of what was wrong) have been able to escape that bubble of narcissism. They’re still subject to the common fallacy of believing anyone different from them must be horrible because, after all, their own wonderfulness is so obvious and undeniable, but at least they don’t only understand reality as a mirror/extension of themselves.
Mike
I didn’t bother. I listened to him few times when he was on the late Don Imus’ radio show. He’s an opinionated jerk and hard core lefty with only a modest grasp of reality.
I came to the conclusion long ago that journalists are corrupt and dishonest and not very intelligent.
Paul in Boston:
Nevertheless what he says about the money angle and what happened to drive polarizing news after the internet came to be a player is interesting. I think he makes some very good points on that topic.
I have had occasion to work with journalists, some of them names you have heard many times. I didn’t find them any more corrupt, dishonest, or lacking in intelligence than your average collection of people. They are more narcissistic, though. Probably in equal measure to a similar group of politicians, with whom I have also worked. Neither group thinks of itself as “normal.” They are more correct in that diagnosis than they realize, but not in a good way.
BTW, those three frames on the wall on the far side of the room are the covers of Rolling Stone magazines in which he appears. That’s the narcissism I’m talking about.
Sometimes the acorn is just so ding-dang big that the blind hog runs straight into it and gets shaken out of his usual frame of reference. I think that’s what happens with people of evil and/or insanity who occasionally see a glimmering of Truth.
I think his opposition to Russia, Russia, Russia was, like Greenwald’s, because of his love for Russia, not for Trump. He also recognizes that the modern left is dominated by the elites, not the proletariat.
Chuck: I’d say Matt Taibbi is driven by an affection for the Russian people. Plus he recognizes the danger when intelligent services and the deep state work behind the scenes for their own ends, even if those ends happen to favor Taibbi’s own.
I’m somewhat of a Russophile myself. Oh, their writers such as Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Pasternak and Mayakovsky, and their phenomenal chess players! To me their leadership from the czars to the Communists to the Putinistas is a tragedy for humanity. Then again, Russians must bear some responsibility, so I don’t know.
Here’s a funny Soviet film from 1977 which won an International Film Festival award. Boris Spassky, in an interview, turned me on to it. It’s about a Mutt-and-Jeff pair of guys who blunder into Moscow, without money, and try to make their way. Hilarity ensues. With a higher budget it could have been a Robert Altman film.
Don’t all rush out to watch it at once!
–“Mimino” (Falcon)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4k2LNPRV-0
This is true and we need to talk about it. Their business model is based on keeping us stirred up and angry/agitated to maximize their income. I think many also enjoy their ‘influence’ and cannot resist abusing this power.
F:
They may indeed be narcissistic, but I disagree that the framed covers are evidence of narcissism. If someone displayed a trophy, award, or diploma, does that make the person a narcissist? I have a poster from a dance concert that has my name on it. It’s a nice poster, hardly anyone sees it, but it’s on a wall near my bedroom. I don’t consider that sort of thing a big deal; it’s normal.
“Here’s a video of a very interesting talk by Matt Taibbi on the way that money drives news decisions that help polarize America further. I think it’s worth listening to, although I think he leaves out a lot, as well.”
He focuses upon the MSM’s secondary aspect and ignores the MSM’s far greater primary motivation…
In doing so, he reveals himself to be an abject apologist. Its not possible for an objective observer to be unaware of the MSM’s blatant bias that utterly violates journalist ethics and thus journalism’s raison d’être. Far more likely that his ‘criticism’ is meant to be constructive, as in ‘come on guys, your overt bias is counter productive and greatly helping the right’.
Most of what is presented as “news” is actually Narrative. The Narrative, or story, is predetermined with the “facts” made to conform to it.
Therefore, since the Narrative is Trump is a racist and white supremacist, all facts in a story must conform and confirm the Narrative.
When the media interview someone, they should always record it to show how the media manipulates what they say to fit their Narrative.
Speaking of Greenwald… Over at Althouse yesterday or so, she posted this piece from Glenn, the upshot of which is, “If you really believe Trump is the evil, racist, authoritarian narcissist you’ve been saying he is for the past almost four years, how on Earth do you justify now wishing him well?” IOW, “Come on, you know you never believed any of the crap you said about him.” He’s no fan of Trump, but he, like Taibbi, does sometimes hold his own side’s feet to the fire.
[Greenwarld’s] no fan of Trump, but he, like Taibbi, does sometimes hold his own side’s feet to the fire.
Jamie: And we give him that much.
Neo:
I won’t say you’re wrong about the covers evidencing narcissism, and I will admit. that I have files full of op-ed columns I have written. But I don’t frame them on the wall, something I have seen other writers do with a magazine cover from a publication in which they have an article.
Perhaps it’s not evidence of narcissism: you’re the expert on things like that. It feels like that to my non-professional judgement. But I won’t insist on that interpretation as I will admit I’m not an expert. Just my gut feeling.
F,
If I were on the cover of 200 magazines and had each cover framed and all put on the walls of my home, that might be narcissism. But 3, 4 or even a half dozen would, in my opinion, not be close to convincing evidence of narcissism.
Even so, Taibbi might or might not be a narcissist.
Ira
F:
That was just my personal opinion. You might be correct, or I might be correct.
Remember McLuhan’s “The medium is the message”? And his observation that the content of a new medium is initially an older one – like movies were the initial content of TV and stage dramas the initial content of movies? The Eagles nailed the news with the line “It’s the same old murder movie, they just call it the news.” My point is simply that TV news is first and foremost drama. They fit the words to the footage, not the other way around, because it is primarily about manipulating emotions, not presenting facts. The footage shows the knee in George Floyd’s back, It does not show the Fentanyl which requires a blood test to detect. It is literally a murder movie and our emotional reaction to it then spreads around the world via the new medium of Twitter. So of course we burn down our cities as the logical result of the media induced collective delusion.
I couldn’t say whether Taibbi is a narcissist or not, but I’ll go with another writer, Joan Didion:
______________________________________________
My only advantage as a reporter is that I am so physically small, so temperamentally unobtrustive, and so neurotically inarticulate that people tend to forget that my presence runs counter to their best interests. And it always does. That is one last thing to remember: writers are always selling somebody out.
–Joan Didion, “Slouching Towards Bethlehem” (1968)
On the subject of unquestioned assumptions (the worldview in which we each live), this is a serious post from what is usually a rather unserious site.
https://notthebee.com/article/this-christian-author-perfectly-summarizes-what-it-really-means-to-listen-to-leftist-culture
(quoting from the author’s own post)
The news business has finally reached its natural level.
https://www.redstate.com/mike_miller/2020/10/06/nbc-beclowns-itself-with-biden-infomercial-town-hall-sham-undecided-voters-not-so-much/
“Infomercial” – that’s driven by marketing and money, isn’t it?
And the narcissistic entitlement syndrome.
https://www.redstate.com/tladuke/2020/10/06/joe-rogan-mocks-spotify-woke-23-year-old-kids-complaining-about-his-show/
J P Sears explains:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB50heKBxgw&feature=youtu.be
“My answer would be to point out that she’s already made assumptions and believes her assumptions to be true, and might need to really dive deep, read some discussions on the right about those issues regarding Trump, and challenge herself and her assumptions.” – Neo about the interviewer
Maybe she could have one of those “conversation” the Left is always claiming we need, and do some listening herself, instead of making the Right do all the work.
A serious post from an unserious site.
https://notthebee.com/article/this-christian-author-perfectly-summarizes-what-it-really-means-to-listen-to-leftist-culture
One must assume that media revenues – $$$$- would somehow be lower if they were not propaganda outlets for the demokrat party. So the idea that their biased reporting is a money thing does not hold water.
I submit they would have a larger viewing audience (and more newspaper subscribers) if they were unbiased; they would pick up that segment of viewers/readers that presently will not watch/read their left wing propaganda bullshit ; folks like me.
And this would increase their revenues.
One has to conclude that the media bigwigs – the ones who determine how and what will be reported – just like 95% of all academics, Hollywood morons and other “intellectuals,” are all hard core leftists and are motivated by the fact (and it IS A FACT) that if a lie is repeated often enough, it will be believed and the bigger the lie, the more readily it will be believed.
Thus the never ending spewing of hate Trump propaganda.
The media’s “reporting” is motivated by ideology, not money.
John Tyler:
I think he is saying that the newspeople discovered that in the internet age hate and partisanship sells best. I think that is true.
I also think that it happens to align with the goals and views of those in charge. I think both things drive the phenomenon.
The behavior of the Spotify wokesters who want to ban Joe Rogan podcasts…combined with a lot of similar things…reminds me of the Air Dictatorship, in H G Wells’ 1933 SF novel ‘The Shape of Things to Come.’
The idea is that the people who have control of the world’s air forces and air transportation come together to establish a worldwide and benevolent Air Dictatorship, with the aim of establishing peace and prosperity for all. Their approach to this includes suppressing all religions, establishing Basic English as the global language, and conscripting the world’s youth to perform labor service.
The current crew seems to think that their mastery of social media and other Internet technologies will allow them to enforce their ideas in a way similar to the way the creators of the Air Dictatorship used their mastery of aviation. But the wokesters are forgetting how replaceable most of them are as individuals, and how replaceable most of their companies (including Spotify) will eventually turn out to be.
John Tyler…”The media’s “reporting” is motivated by ideology, not money.”
I think this is indeed true in many though not all cases. It certainly seems unlikely that CNN and MSNBC as configured are making the maximum possible contribution to the profits of their respective owners, AT&T and Comcast.
I have long thought that conservatives should treat the press as an attorney would. When the question contained “facts not in evidence” the press should be called out on it in those very terms… every time.