I wouldn't even give then the credit of calling what they do "advocacy". It is literally agitprop which could be ans probably is written directly by the White House, the DNC or whatever thing is needed at the moment. When their purpose isn't directly aiding the Democratic Party, it is advancing a form of revolutionary leftism by whitewashing what the left's storm troops are doing in out streets. The only ones influenced by what the Post or Times publishes are already hysterical Democrats. And yes your very first point is very true. We no longer have a legitimate mainstream media. The only place to get the truth is conservative alternative media (like here for example) or The Free Press or maybe the Dispatch. But most Americans will never see it. They just know "the news" is lies and the media thinks they are morons. And it's terrible for a free society.
Although it is not the main point of Bill's essay, I do not think it is true that the press was the main force bringing out the truth of the Watergate case. I first read of the Watergate burglary in a small article on an inside page of the weekend edition of the Sacramento Bee. About all it had was that a group of men were caught having broken into the DNC office, with wiretap equipment. When I read that article the first time, there was not the slightest doubt in my mind that the burglars were working for the Nixon campaign. Who else would have an interest in that? The press gave some prominence to the story that week, but it actually received little attention for the rest of 1972. I think the reason is that although the press was mostly Democratic, it was actually more patriotic than moved by flagrant partisanship. They disliked Nixon, but they also knew McGovern would be bad for the country and did not want to blow up the administration before the election. The Washington Post deserves credit for keeping the story alive during 1972, but they did not really come up with the major facts. What broke the dam was the persistence of U.S. District Court Judge John Sirica, who presided at the burglars' trial.
He gave steep conditional penalties to the defendants, but held open the possibility of leniency if they told what they knew. One of the burglars, John McCord, spilt the beans, and that led to all the water quickly coming over the broken dam.
In general, of course, Bill is right that the press was far superior then than now. I think the myth of the Washington Post being the key hero of Watergate contributed to the deterioration, as every journalist suddenly thought exposing some horrendous scandal was more important than reporting stories correctly. The most important factor in the decline of journalism was the rejection of objectivity as a goal for superficial beliefs that there is no objective reality.
The reason Watergate did not blow up in 1972 is that the Washington Post and other big outlets did not think it responsible to simply print what they believed to be true without evidence of it. It took time and investigation to reveal the truth as we know. I don't believe for a second they held back from hurting Nixon because they feared a McGovern presidency. I am certain most of the staff of the Post and the Times voted for McGovern. Today of course the mearest rumor that could hurt a Republican is blasted while anything that can hurt a Democrat even if demonstrably true is buried.
Completely correct. They hide the truth till they can’t hide the truth. And they will do it again
I wouldn't even give then the credit of calling what they do "advocacy". It is literally agitprop which could be ans probably is written directly by the White House, the DNC or whatever thing is needed at the moment. When their purpose isn't directly aiding the Democratic Party, it is advancing a form of revolutionary leftism by whitewashing what the left's storm troops are doing in out streets. The only ones influenced by what the Post or Times publishes are already hysterical Democrats. And yes your very first point is very true. We no longer have a legitimate mainstream media. The only place to get the truth is conservative alternative media (like here for example) or The Free Press or maybe the Dispatch. But most Americans will never see it. They just know "the news" is lies and the media thinks they are morons. And it's terrible for a free society.
Well, the Donks and the press are staring down a McGovern-level loss, from all appearances ...
Although it is not the main point of Bill's essay, I do not think it is true that the press was the main force bringing out the truth of the Watergate case. I first read of the Watergate burglary in a small article on an inside page of the weekend edition of the Sacramento Bee. About all it had was that a group of men were caught having broken into the DNC office, with wiretap equipment. When I read that article the first time, there was not the slightest doubt in my mind that the burglars were working for the Nixon campaign. Who else would have an interest in that? The press gave some prominence to the story that week, but it actually received little attention for the rest of 1972. I think the reason is that although the press was mostly Democratic, it was actually more patriotic than moved by flagrant partisanship. They disliked Nixon, but they also knew McGovern would be bad for the country and did not want to blow up the administration before the election. The Washington Post deserves credit for keeping the story alive during 1972, but they did not really come up with the major facts. What broke the dam was the persistence of U.S. District Court Judge John Sirica, who presided at the burglars' trial.
He gave steep conditional penalties to the defendants, but held open the possibility of leniency if they told what they knew. One of the burglars, John McCord, spilt the beans, and that led to all the water quickly coming over the broken dam.
In general, of course, Bill is right that the press was far superior then than now. I think the myth of the Washington Post being the key hero of Watergate contributed to the deterioration, as every journalist suddenly thought exposing some horrendous scandal was more important than reporting stories correctly. The most important factor in the decline of journalism was the rejection of objectivity as a goal for superficial beliefs that there is no objective reality.
The reason Watergate did not blow up in 1972 is that the Washington Post and other big outlets did not think it responsible to simply print what they believed to be true without evidence of it. It took time and investigation to reveal the truth as we know. I don't believe for a second they held back from hurting Nixon because they feared a McGovern presidency. I am certain most of the staff of the Post and the Times voted for McGovern. Today of course the mearest rumor that could hurt a Republican is blasted while anything that can hurt a Democrat even if demonstrably true is buried.