General Discussion

Last edited Mon Sep 1, 2025, 09:57 AM - Edit history (1)

The old canon of journalism was good, including the Fairness Doctrine that Reagan killed. But that canon has been severely degraded for 30 years and doesn't exist in ANY form in any of the major media now.

Take for example that ABC interview of Pritzker that people have been praising. The interviewer spent the whole time quizzing Pritzker about why he wasn't kissing Trump's ass and not once ever acknowledged that everything Trump is doing with the national Guard, ICE, tariffs. etc is absolutely illegal -- in direct opposition to the Constitution. I have to admire Pritzker's patience with that idiot. He must have had quite an urge to burst across the table and shake that guy by the neck saying, "Have you ever even read the Constitution? How can you ask questions like this? How dare you call yourself a journalist. You are only interested in stirring up the shit."

A legitimate journalist would acknowledge that:
* Deploying military against the people is illegal (Posse Comitatus)
* Trump is threatening only states with Democratic Governors
* If it were about crime, there are 25 major cities (mostly in red states) with higher crime rates than Chicago

But the ABC person didn't acknowledge ANY of those points, even when Pritzker spelled them out plainly.

A legitimate journalist would acknowledge the facts and then direct the questioning to what we SHOULD be doing, given these facts.

Yet, as unprofessional as this interview was, many here still praised it because it wasn't as bad as what we usually get. That's bullshit. We should be demanding that these networks uphold ethical, fact-based journalistic principles. We can't have an honest, useful dialog when the interviewers dwell entirely in the domain of "Trump facts" (e.g. "Everybody knows Chicago is a hellhole.&quot