Political Theatre category archive
Truthiness in Labeling 0
Aside:
On a recent episode of The Bob Cesca Show podcast I forget just which one one of the participants I also forget just who pointed out that journalists follow leads, research stories, attempt to determine the facts, and report the facts to the best of their abilities.
Compared to Julian Assange and Wikileaks, Hedda Hopper was Helen Thomas and Walter Winchell was Walter Cronkite and that boy trapped in a refrigerator did eat his own foot.
A Sympton, Not a Cause 0
David is not sanguine. (Warning: Short digression at the beginning.)
Pondering Purism* 0
My two or three regular readers know that I occasionally grump about “purists” on the left.
I find David’s discussion of “purity tests” regarding the herd of declared candidates for the Democratic nomination for president to be interesting. I don’t say that I agree with him completely, but I don’t have to agree with someone completely to find his or her comments interesting.
_________________
* I think the case can be made that, in politics, “purism” differs from “purity.”
I submit that the term “purism” should apply to those of whom I have grumped: the I agree with you on 95% of the issues but I disagree with you on [insert tiny thing], therefore I’m going to vote for [insert whacko third party candidate] crowd.
Sinsory Overload 0
Brian Klass is disturbed that we seem to have become inured to tennis ball machine of Trumpling. A snippet:
Follow the link for the rest.
The Rich Are Different from You and Me 0
They get to have their own special brand of “socialism,” only don’t you dare call it that.
Robert Reich explains:
If this isn’t socialism, what is it?
Yet it’s a particular form of socialism.
Follow the link to learn more about this “particular form of socialism.”
Russian Instincts 0
Shaun Mullen is not sanguine. A snippet:
Follow the link for his explanation.
Freedom of Screech 0
Shorter Shaun Mullen: Whatever he may be, Julian Assange is not a member of the press corps.
It’s All about the Algorithm, Reprise 0
At the San Francisco Chronicle, John Diaz argues that, as persons increasing turn to the internet for news, the dominance of Google and Facebook and their use of algorithms designed to keep you “engaged,”* rather than informed, is warping and distorting persons’ perception of what is and what isn’t news. He also suggests that, as persons are more and more relying on “aggregators,” the revenue for outfits that do actual reporting, as opposed the “aggregation,” is suffering. These factors, in his eyes, and distorting and diluting the discourse and, ultimately, weakening the polity.
A snippet:
The playing field is anything but level. And the result is devastating for publishers who are becoming increasingly dependent on a digital audience as print circulation continues its decline.
__________________
Listen to the Bad Voltage podcast which I mentioned yesterday for more about “engagement” and “inform-ment.”
