Public Trust in Media At All Time Low; Independents' Trust In Media Falls to Level of Republicans' Trust in Media

Well, a statistical tie, anyway -- 33% of Independents say they have trust in the media, compared to 32% of Republicans.

The Washington Post's haplessly biased Chris Cilzza blames this on "partisans" sabotaging trust in the media.

I agree. Media partisans like Chris Cilizza are indeed the problem.

But, I believe really strongly that the decline in trust in the media is primarily attributable to partisans -- whether in politics or in the media -- who have a vested interest in casting the press as hopelessly biased. What better way for liberal or conservative talk radio to (a) lure listeners and (b) stoke outrage than to insist that the mainstream media is lying to you? What better way for politicians to raise money from partisans already skeptical about the media than to say the media isn’t telling the truth?

Several points here.

1, I think it's creepy that the forces of corporate-political conformity are so insistent that we trust them.

Why do you, complete strangers to me, think it is necessary for our national health for me to trust you, as a group?

I don't trust lawyers as a group -- specific lawyers, yes. But as a group? No.

And I'm not singling out lawyers either -- I don't trust doctors as a group, nor teachers as a group, nor mechanics as a group.

This idea that we must all be on the same page and believe the same things is not only a central pillar of collectivist thought -- it is absolutely necessary to the furtherance of the collectivist agenda that we all "agree" to trust a single narrative.

A single narrative explains to us (falsely, through mythology) what is Wicked in our society and how to go about Appeasing the Gods who will otherwise visit terrors upon us.

A plethora of competing narratives -- of arguments over first causes and political creation myths -- keeps the Clerisy, or the Cathedral as the Nrx crowd calls it, from leading the bewitched populace on their numerous crusades.

So I find Cilizza's starting premise that everyone agreeing that the media is non-partisan to be one of the most important partisan desiderata of the political left.

2, this is of course whining and special pleading from people who can't do their jobs very well but what to keep telling us how harrrrrrd it is in hopes we'll grade them on the curve.

Well, we already are grading you on the curve -- we've priced in most of your partisanship and incompetency -- and you're still failing.

Here's an idea for Cilizza and the rest of the would-be high priests of collectivist advance to ponder -- hey, maybe if you did your jobs better, and more competently, and less dishonestly, people would trust you more, and then you could stop whining at the rest of us that you're not held in the high social estimation to which you believe yourselves entitled.

Incidentally, Cillizza writes for the same Washington Post that published that ludicrously partisan piece calling Carly Fiorina a liar for having claimed to have been a secretary.

She was a secretary. No lie. Simple fact.

Let me tell you what this is really about. Here, I'll whisper it:

The abortion partisans of the media are angry at here for mainstreaming the Planned Parenthood videos are determined to get a scalp for that.

Thus, the intense pro-abortion SJW partisans of the media go into Political Attack mode.

But we're not supposed to notice.

We're just supposed to Trust them, for some reason.

Because they went to college, I guess.

posted by Ace at 03:27 PM

| Access Comments