|
Post by Bact PhD on Jun 3, 2024 2:30:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Jun 3, 2024 16:08:58 GMT
New cutline to replace Democracy Dies in Darkness...it will be Democracy Dies Under Murdoch Cloak.
|
|
|
Post by Bact PhD on Oct 25, 2024 22:05:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Oct 25, 2024 22:41:57 GMT
I'm not defending Bezos but I'm wondering if he's pretty much abdicated authority over the paper and letting this Wall Street Journal Murdoch origin guy do what he wants. And...the Los Angeles Times tech bro owner also prevented that paper from making any endorsement. The Times editor in chief has resigned over it.
|
|
|
Post by Rue Bella on Oct 26, 2024 1:23:27 GMT
From Wikipedia - the decline of newspapers:
To play devil's advocate - without much interest in the subject and having made only one quick search - it could be a business decision. Yes, the election is important, but how much do newspapers endorsements matter? My own local paper, in existence for about 100 years, went out of business a couple years ago. No one was interested in buying their equipment beyond shelving and fork lifts. They did not have much of an online presence either.
If any medium comes out strongly in favor of something or someone, they will lose readers/watchers. I've seen numerous times the past few months when reading here and there, people saying that they have cancelled their subscription to this or that because of what someone printed. Likely advertisers too.
Of course, when an outlet becomes totally vanilla (or too extreme like Twitter), reporting only weather, high school sports, and holiday sales, how much are they worth?
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Oct 26, 2024 15:05:39 GMT
From Wikipedia - the decline of newspapers: To play devil's advocate - without much interest in the subject and having made only one quick search - it could be a business decision. Yes, the election is important, but how much do newspapers endorsements matter? My own local paper, in existence for about 100 years, went out of business a couple years ago. No one was interested in buying their equipment beyond shelving and fork lifts. They did not have much of an online presence either. If any medium comes out strongly in favor of something or someone, they will lose readers/watchers. I've seen numerous times the past few months when reading here and there, people saying that they have cancelled their subscription to this or that because of what someone printed. Likely advertisers too. Of course, when an outlet becomes totally vanilla (or too extreme like Twitter), reporting only weather, high school sports, and holiday sales, how much are they worth? My first inclination was to cancel both my WaPo and LA Times subscriptions. But I didn't because I don't take advice from newspapers on how to vote. I want to read well reported news or relatively well reported news. Plus I know a reporter from my local newspaper who has survived wave after wave of layoffs over the last 10 years. The newspaper industry is declining, dying even. I won't add to that.
|
|
andydp
Tenured Full Professor
Posts: 3,010
|
Post by andydp on Oct 26, 2024 18:04:07 GMT
My first inclination was to cancel both my WaPo and LA Times subscriptions. But I didn't because I don't take advice from newspapers on how to vote. I want to read well reported news or relatively well reported news. Plus I know a reporter from my local newspaper who has survived wave after wave of layoffs over the last 10 years. The newspaper industry is declining, dying even. I won't add to that. I equate some of that to trashing your Keurig because "Keurig went woke". It means absolutely nothing to their bottom line; much like the NFL and Disney have "suffered" from the boycotts. Years ago, newspapers were "kingmakers" of a sort. Now its a toss up.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Oct 27, 2024 10:35:48 GMT
The newspaper whose tagline is "Democracy dies in the dark" goes dark instead of defending Democracy.
The opinion section of newspapers is generally a waste of ink and paper as far as I am concerned. (Who, what, where, when, and why is all I want. Anything else can validly be expressed only as a cartoon.) Even so this seems a pretty cowardly change of course.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Oct 27, 2024 11:45:32 GMT
In general, I would say there are two intertwining myths about America that are at work culturally in a way that seems utterly destructive to me. The first is that (in my experience anecdotally but which appears to be supported more generally from observation) is that people who are 'successful' financially believe it is the result of a secret sauce they alone posses and that that secret sauce can be lathered onto any venture in any industry and they will replicate their success. Other people seem to buy into this as well. Musk and Twitter is a pretty obvious example. The other myth is that industry disruption is a good thing. I mean, sure it CAN be a good thing, but disruption should not be an objective, it is a means.
The tech industry has enabled relatively young people to amass great fortunes and as a result insulate themselves from the world at large before ever having the kind of real world experiences that foster empathy for their fellow humans. As a result, they seem incapable of yielding their power responsibly. And I don't mean to paint with too overly broad of a brush because I know there are exceptions but it is the irresponsible ones that get all the press, literally and figuratively.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Oct 27, 2024 16:26:32 GMT
In general, I would say there are two intertwining myths about America that are at work culturally in a way that seems utterly destructive to me. The first is that (in my experience anecdotally but which appears to be supported more generally from observation) is that people who are 'successful' financially believe it is the result of a secret sauce they alone posses and that that secret sauce can be lathered onto any venture in any industry and they will replicate their success. Other people seem to buy into this as well. Musk and Twitter is a pretty obvious example. The other myth is that industry disruption is a good thing. I mean, sure it CAN be a good thing, but disruption should not be an objective, it is a means. The tech industry has enabled relatively young people to amass great fortunes and as a result insulate themselves from the world at large before ever having the kind of real world experiences that foster empathy for their fellow humans. As a result, they seem incapable of yielding their power responsibly. And I don't mean to paint with too overly broad of a brush because I know there are exceptions but it is the irresponsible ones that get all the press, literally and figuratively. If a person is wealthy it must be because they are smart. It's part Calvinistic because wealth shows that the possessor is among the "elect" and part materialistic where the highest goal of someone is to have all the toys you could want. I wonder if the tech industry is partly why some of the young men of today seem to be floundering, uninterested in education, or even in work. They waiting to form that one good tech idea that will make them wealthy.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Oct 28, 2024 10:45:49 GMT
I think young men have always kind of had the rap of being shiftless and aimless from us older folks, haven't they? When I was your age kind of thing. Is this generation somehow worse? I really don't know. They face some challenges that I certainty didn't especially in the job market. The cost of higher education is insane and has led to lifelong debt service. I could pay for both of my sons so they could exit college debt free but most can't. I know from helping them both with job searches in the last 8 years how horrible it is to see those 'no job experience required' jobs (and there aren't that many of them) still requiring college degrees and paying 30K a year and yet they have no real career paths associated with them. You aren't taking a job with little pay with the expectation to work your way into something better. More likely you are getting a job that you have just as long as the economy stays in decent shape. That is most of them unless they are tech related. My sons were fortunate that they both landed initial jobs at a large state university. Pay wasn't much but security was there and benefits were good and with no debt they were able to start building up savings immediately and with some money in the bank they can afford to manage some calculated risks in pursuing careers. My older son has already wrangled it into a really well-paying job (in tech, naturally). Again, most can't. Depending on how you view these things as for good or ill a lot of them still see themselves as potentially being family providers and that is really challenging in this environment. They are facing one of life's most brutal truths: no one really needs them and so I guess I don't really blame them for being angry and/or confused and looking for short-cuts like crypto. They are the lottery buyers of the new generation because the old genetic lottery has become problematic for them. As stupid as it is I think some of them have convinced themselves that Trump might somehow magically make them have value.
Most of the MAGA folks claim backing Trump isn't about racism and I kind of/sort of believe them I guess. I mean, sure, many of them are racists, but their primary concern is actually not skin color but gender related. Making America great again is about going back to a world where the tracks to power and money for all those white christian males were pre-greased in their favor. Getting a good job was a matter of having connections through a network of white christian male acquaintances and you didn't have to compete with women for the same jobs. This, of course, still happens if you are in the right economic circles but it use to be much more broadly available (though never really available to poor people of course). Good jobs are now much more concentrated in the hands of a few large corporations. 'DEI' at those large corporations takes away some of that grease they like so much. Nobody really wants to play on a level field.
When you are on top you rightly fear the mistreatment you visited upon the out groups could be soon visited upon you when your fortunes decline. And for good reason too, because people are people. They seem more preoccupied in ensuring other groups are worse off and stay worse off than they are in just about anything else. I think it's that fear we are seeing.
Anyway, that's my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Rue Bella on Oct 29, 2024 0:51:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rue Bella on Oct 29, 2024 1:29:13 GMT
Depending on how you view these things as for good or ill a lot of them still see themselves as potentially being family providers and that is really challenging in this environment. They are facing one of life's most brutal truths: no one really needs them and so I guess I don't really blame them for being angry and/or confused and looking for short-cuts like crypto. They are the lottery buyers of the new generation because the old genetic lottery has become problematic for them. As stupid as it is I think some of them have convinced themselves that Trump might somehow magically make them have value.
[snip]
When you are on top you rightly fear the mistreatment you visited upon the out groups could be soon visited upon you when your fortunes decline. And for good reason too, because people are people. They seem more preoccupied in ensuring other groups are worse off and stay worse off than they are in just about anything else. I think it's that fear we are seeing.
Anyway, that's my two cents.
I think much of Trump's appeal has to do with gender issues. Not trans stuff, but how men, esp young ones, see themselves. Traditionally family providers, head of household, bring in the money, their kids, etc. Like in the '50s. Now, women are working, taking jobs from men, not even needing men as fathers, etc. And, heaven forbid, being president. As you say, "no one really needs them". Not true of course, but perception is what counts. Not only with respect to dark-skinned people, but with respect to women. Keep them at home, cooking and pregnant. No abortions for you. And as JD said, stay in abusive marriages. Trump may be addled, but he still has a talent for reading the room. That is what all the Arnold Palmer stuff was about. Being a real man, men being back in charge of everything again. Put those stupid broads back in their rightful places. My 4 cents. Inflation, don-cha-know.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Oct 29, 2024 11:40:53 GMT
Depending on how you view these things as for good or ill a lot of them still see themselves as potentially being family providers and that is really challenging in this environment. They are facing one of life's most brutal truths: no one really needs them and so I guess I don't really blame them for being angry and/or confused and looking for short-cuts like crypto. They are the lottery buyers of the new generation because the old genetic lottery has become problematic for them. As stupid as it is I think some of them have convinced themselves that Trump might somehow magically make them have value.
[snip]
When you are on top you rightly fear the mistreatment you visited upon the out groups could be soon visited upon you when your fortunes decline. And for good reason too, because people are people. They seem more preoccupied in ensuring other groups are worse off and stay worse off than they are in just about anything else. I think it's that fear we are seeing.
Anyway, that's my two cents.
I think much of Trump's appeal has to do with gender issues. Not trans stuff, but how men, esp young ones, see themselves. Traditionally family providers, head of household, bring in the money, their kids, etc. Like in the '50s. Now, women are working, taking jobs from men, not even needing men as fathers, etc. And, heaven forbid, being president. As you say, "no one really needs them". Not true of course, but perception is what counts. Not only with respect to dark-skinned people, but with respect to women. Keep them at home, cooking and pregnant. No abortions for you. And as JD said, stay in abusive marriages. Trump may be addled, but he still has a talent for reading the room. That is what all the Arnold Palmer stuff was about. Being a real man, men being back in charge of everything again. Put those stupid broads back in their rightful places. My 4 cents. Inflation, don-cha-know.
I think a lot of the emotional processing is subliminal and everything comes out kind of screwed up. That procreation urge is still strong and I think they have their heads on just straight enough to not say 'Put those stupid broads back in their rightful place' so they twist it into 'everything is the fault of immigrants and dei and lbqt' because that's not going to be as alienating to potential mates or, at least, some of them and yet it still supports strengthening their own roles. Notably, however, they really have done everything just short of saying it, e.g., abortion, and they just didn't (collectively) give women enough credit to figure out what is really going on. I guess this election might tell us if they were right.
The bottom line is that men's role in society HAS changed and they are confused and angry. As a man, I get that. Most of us are dumb as a post (not to be sexist that applies to women too) and have no idea what to do. They set fire to ballot boxes or pass restrictive legislation or other idiotic and/or self-destructive things. Things men tend to do even when they aren't in the midst of undergoing a crisis of confidence, especially the young ones. They could look at it as a glass half-full kind of thing (there are reasons men tend to die earlier and many of them by suicide) but you know, they aren't, so I believe it is going to be a good while before things settle down and it's not all that helpful they think they have a mandate from god. A lot of people seem to think that once Trump exists, all will be good again. I'm not one of those people.
|
|
AnBr
Associate Professor
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by AnBr on Oct 29, 2024 13:35:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rue Bella on Oct 29, 2024 18:53:06 GMT
The bottom line is that men's role in society HAS changed and they are confused and angry. As a man, I get that.
There is no doubt about that. But women's roles have changed too, drastically. -Women have only had the vote for about 100 years. -In my lifetime a single woman could not get a credit card nor any loan without a man to co-sign. -When I was 20ish, in grad school (UC system), and wanted to go on the summer field trip with the prof and 3 fellow male grad students of equal status in my lab, I had to ask each one if it was OK if I, a woman, could go too. I'm old, but it really wasn't that long ago. -Women in the military now on the front lines (or something) -Toss in the sexual revolution with birth control, abortion, kids out of marriage, the phasing out of religion for many, and the landscape for women has changed too.
Superficially, it seems women may have gained more, while men may have lost more. Just my impression. There is much for both men and women to adjust to. We are in this together.
Most of us are dumb as a post (not to be sexist that applies to women too) and have no idea what to do.
I don't think either group, or combined as a single species, are dumb at all (though some certainly are). We simply are living in a time when present circumstances have out-paced what we have been evolutionarily prepared for. Just consider all the information we are exposed to daily. TV, the internet, social media, all infused with misinformation or liars. You name it. Our still primitive brains are not geared to deal with it all. Add to that changes in social structure, climate change, over-population and there's no wonder that many people, perhaps especially men (not their fault), are confused and angry. I frankly see no easy solution.
Women are not going back, and men want to fulfill the role history has bestowed upon them.
|
|
|
Post by indy on Oct 30, 2024 0:10:58 GMT
Well, saying 'I get it' is not buying into it, just that I get what is going on in their minds (or at least I think I do). People tend to see life as a zero sum game: women are being empowered, ergo men must be being diminished; black people are being empowered, ergo white people must be being diminished; gays are being empowered; ergo straight people must be being diminished. It's silly and as you say we are all in this together. Each person that is given the opportunity to fulfill whatever potential they have improves society more generally, whether it is women, men, black, white, brown, immigrant, native, cis, bi, queer, whatever. It's an addition, not an addition with a corresponding subtraction somewhere else.
I think you are letting men off too easily because this whole alternating victimhood/acting out thing they are displaying right now is nothing but a ploy for sympathy. Throughout human history, whether through religious indoctrination, societal shaming, property ownership, legal duplicity, economic blackmail, fear mongering, outright violence, or any and all other means available to them, men have tightly and ruthlessly gripped the reigns of their power, particularly white men. Right now that means is Donald Trump, and a majority of them are happy to fall in line and do whatever they can to intimidate everyone else into doing it as well.
As to how dumb our general population is, we may just have to agree to disagree there but I'm not sure there is a lot of daylight between you saying 'we don't really comprehend what we are doing because we are too biologically constrained and can't effectively process the inputs' (if that's a fair encapsulation of what you are saying) and me saying most of us are as 'dumb as a post'. Seems like two sides of the same coin to me though admittedly yours has more rhetorical flourish while mine has a little more Hemingwayesque economy of words.
|
|
|
Post by Rue Bella on Oct 31, 2024 1:35:59 GMT
In many/most cases, I'm sure you are right. I'm a childless cat lady. And although my cats are male, I doubt that gives me any extra insight. I think we agree on the great numbers of stupid people out there. For my sanity however, I came to the conclusion that since most do not choose to be stupid, I view them more like the ground squirrels that eat my garden - they just are doing what their nature dictates. Fortunately my squirrels can't vote.
|
|