Okeefenokee wrote:Dozens of major publications all perpetuating the same narrative, and you're saying it doesn't mean anything unless every single outlet says it. If one paper goes against the narrative, then there's no collusion.
And of the
minor publications?
Collusion? The "dark" thing was a buzzword. Journalism these days pick up buzzwords like the rest of us pick up memes. Expecting they're all cooperating in some sort of big, elaborate conspiracy is given them some extremely large credit. And yeah, all those major publications write what
they write... they are not "The Press". They are
part of the press, just like SJW's are not "the People", they are
part of the people.
And yes, if even one paper does not "collude" as you say, it makes no sense to say that "the press/media" was working against Trump. Breitbart's the media too, remember?
Not that I get why on earth it's even a bad thing they did that. If the press doesn't criticize the powerful, no matter who they are, it may as well form into one giant state controlled North Korea-like propaganda machine for the state. Fucking weaklings needing safe spaces left and right.
Fame is not flattery. Respect is not agreement.