American Politics: An Unwelcome World

[Untecna]

Neither, I trust the reporter who's actually responsible for covering the story in a news format. The socialist is writing for an opinion column, and the billionaire wouldn't give a damn.

Yeah, I've got news for you buddy - the socialist is doing that reporting. It might surprise you, but people are able to separate their thought from fact. Something that billionnaires do not employ except through tough and thorough hypocrisy, though.

Referring back to the original point, you argued that an opinion magazine was more trustworthy than a news broadcaster. Now, I've never argued that wealthy ownership is a good thing; frankly, it stifles news. But the answer is not to suggest partisan opinion columns as viable sources of information.

[Jolthig]

No voting ideas for Wisconsin voters!

[Herargon]

Yeah, I've got news for you buddy - the socialist is doing that reporting. It might surprise you, but people are able to separate their thought from fact. Something that billionnaires do not employ except through tough and thorough hypocrisy, though.

Referring back to the original point, you argued that an opinion magazine was more trustworthy than a news broadcaster. Now, I've never argued that wealthy ownership is a good thing; frankly, it stifles news. But the answer is not to suggest partisan opinion columns as viable sources of information.

I doubt that an ideology that strives for general wellbeing, is an unviable source of information. That said, I think we are on the same page concerning ownership.

[Untecna]

Referring back to the original point, you argued that an opinion magazine was more trustworthy than a news broadcaster. Now, I've never argued that wealthy ownership is a good thing; frankly, it stifles news. But the answer is not to suggest partisan opinion columns as viable sources of information.

I doubt that an ideology that strives for general wellbeing, is an unviable source of information.

Opinion writing is not news. Opinion sharing is not news. News is an entirely separate field.

Those at Jacobin, and their equivalents at conservative outlets, are not reporters. They are pundits with access to paper. There is a critical set of differences, which must be respected.

[Kasdados]

We could’ve elected Williams Jennings Bryan three times… THREE TIMES!

[Herargon]

I doubt that an ideology that strives for general wellbeing, is an unviable source of information.

Opinion writing is not news. Opinion sharing is not news. News is an entirely separate field.

Those at Jacobin, and their equivalents at conservative outlets, are not reporters. They are pundits with access to paper. There is a critical set of differences, which must be respected.

The difference between Jacobin and conservative outlets is that the latter is no equivalent, as conservative outlets are typically owned by billionnaires. The only critical set of difference that must be respected, is that the billionnaire propaganda is better for toilet paper, as it's thicker.

[Ifreann]

The only countries in Africa that typical people remember are Egypt and Madagascar

Typical people probably can't tell the difference on a map between China and Canada.

Also people forget about it because there us a lot of reason to be skeptical that there is anything of the sort going on. 35-45% of the population of Nigeria (Over 100 million people) is Christian and the sectarian violence they battle in their Eastern provinces are not limited to Christian victims.

We might also ask what it is that Americans on the left can do about Boko Haram. Are they backed by the US government? Is there a BHPAC that helps secure them funding and weapons from America?

[Untecna]

Opinion writing is not news. Opinion sharing is not news. News is an entirely separate field.

Those at Jacobin, and their equivalents at conservative outlets, are not reporters. They are pundits with access to paper. There is a critical set of differences, which must be respected.

The difference between Jacobin and conservative outlets is that the latter is no equivalent, as conservative outlets are typically owned by billionnaires. The only critical set of difference that must be respected, is that the billionnaire propaganda is better for toilet paper, as it's thicker.

Oh, don't play dumb. Opinion outlets are opinion outlets; I don't care who they are owned by, they all are not news.

[Burg land]

We could’ve elected Williams Jennings Bryan three times… THREE TIMES!

One more, and Laura Kelly will have a three-timer

[Phoeniae]

I think these two, sheer facts and essays, stay interwined at each other especially at our day. in principle, you could not tell them as truly separate. them better divided for practice along two different colums.

how toqueville said it amonst many others, the reader brought at par through education can not be circumvened, while when it comes to political end the precept of freedom of press is what orwell said.

our dispute orwell inspirationally told, that a straight mind is your own effort, be it either a godsend or trained.

[Burg land]

The only countries in Africa that typical people remember are Egypt and Madagascar

Typical people probably can't tell the difference on a map between China and Canada.

Also people forget about it because there us a lot of reason to be skeptical that there is anything of the sort going on. 35-45% of the population of Nigeria (Over 100 million people) is Christian and the sectarian violence they battle in their Eastern provinces are not limited to Christian victims.

Idk, but China and Canada sound very specific

And yes, Muslims are also being murdered, wiping out almost an entire country because hating their two main religions is barbaric

[Daemonkin of Corn]

Typical people probably can't tell the difference on a map between China and Canada.

Also people forget about it because there us a lot of reason to be skeptical that there is anything of the sort going on. 35-45% of the population of Nigeria (Over 100 million people) is Christian and the sectarian violence they battle in their Eastern provinces are not limited to Christian victims.

We might also ask what it is that Americans on the left can do about Boko Haram. Are they backed by the US government? Is there a BHPAC that helps secure them funding and weapons from America?

Boko Haram is Nigeria's problem. That said Nigeria is our ally. If they can offer anything in exchange for military assistance in their counter terrorism problem and we find our interests align, the what should happen is self explanatory.

Nigeria is a populous, powerful, influential and wealthy nation. They can handle themselves well enough.

[Daemonkin of Corn]

Typical people probably can't tell the difference on a map between China and Canada.

Also people forget about it because there us a lot of reason to be skeptical that there is anything of the sort going on. 35-45% of the population of Nigeria (Over 100 million people) is Christian and the sectarian violence they battle in their Eastern provinces are not limited to Christian victims.

Idk, but China and Canada sound very specific

And yes, Muslims are also being murdered, wiping out almost an entire country because hating their two main religions is barbaric

Nigeria is a huge nation. No one is wiping out anything.

[Burg land]

Idk, but China and Canada sound very specific

And yes, Muslims are also being murdered, wiping out almost an entire country because hating their two main religions is barbaric

Nigeria is a huge nation. No one is wiping out anything.

Maoist China was pretty big

[Daemonkin of Corn]

Nigeria is a huge nation. No one is wiping out anything.

Maoist China was pretty big

Still is.

[Imperializt Russia]

The difference between Jacobin and conservative outlets is that the latter is no equivalent, as conservative outlets are typically owned by billionnaires. The only critical set of difference that must be respected, is that the billionnaire propaganda is better for toilet paper, as it's thicker.

Oh, don't play dumb. Opinion outlets are opinion outlets; I don't care who they are owned by, they all are not news.

Jacobin, the... socialist opinion magazine? You're comparing an opinion magazine to a news broadcaster.

All news sites have opinion sections. Jacobin also has journalists. Or at least, journalists who choose to submit their work to Jacobin.

How are you defining "opinion", exactly?

I don't read Jacobin myself but you seem to be suggesting that because it doesn't have a staff journalist, it is inherently disqualified as journalism.

Would you say the same about, say, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, or Private Eye (a magazine I have read), or a journalist's personal substack? What makes the cutoff, especially in that latter example?

[Untecna]

Oh, don't play dumb. Opinion outlets are opinion outlets; I don't care who they are owned by, they all are not news.

All news sites have opinion sections. Jacobin also has journalists. Or at least, journalists who choose to submit their work to Jacobin.

How are you defining "opinion", exactly?

I don't read Jacobin myself but you seem to be suggesting that because it doesn't have a staff journalist, it is inherently disqualified as journalism.

Would you say the same about, say, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, or Private Eye (a magazine I have read), or a journalist's personal substack? What makes the cutoff, especially in that latter example?

That's not quite what I am saying. There is a standard to journalism; whereas anyone with the means can broadcast their own thoughts, journalism involves a process as devoid as it can get in regards to partisanship, and a standard of fact.

Jacobin and it's contemporaries are opinion pieces; they represent only the ideas of the authors, even if those ideas are but their use of lenses over current events. NBC, on the other hand, does not hold any lenses; it cares only for what the exact matter is.

Now, the mere presence of an opinion column in, say, the New York Times does not make it an opinion outlet; that unit, and the news unit, are separate entities. If Jacobin did this, too, then there could be an argument to be made, but alas, they do not.

[Herargon]

How are you defining "opinion", exactly?

I don't read Jacobin myself but you seem to be suggesting that because it doesn't have a staff journalist, it is inherently disqualified as journalism.

Would you say the same about, say, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, or Private Eye (a magazine I have read), or a journalist's personal substack? What makes the cutoff, especially in that latter example?

That's not quite what I am saying. There is a standard to journalism; whereas anyone with the means can broadcast their own thoughts, journalism involves a process as devoid as it can get in regards to partisanship, and a standard of fact.

Jacobin and it's contemporaries are opinion pieces; they represent only the ideas of the authors, even if those ideas are but their use of lenses over current events. NBC, on the other hand, does not hold any lenses; it cares only for what the exact matter is.

Now, the mere presence of an opinion column in, say, the New York Times does not make it an opinion outlet; that unit, and the news unit, are separate entities. If Jacobin did this, too, then there could be an argument to be made, but alas, they do not.

Boy, if you think NBC doesn't hold any lenses, then you're in for a rude awakening.
The Jacobin has far more of a journalistic standard than any corponews ever could hope to have.

[Sloventa]

This shutdown might go long enough to have a part of the debt paid...
And then Trump will try to get all the credit.
Because of course he does.

[Herargon]

The difference between Jacobin and conservative outlets is that the latter is no equivalent, as conservative outlets are typically owned by billionnaires. The only critical set of difference that must be respected, is that the billionnaire propaganda is better for toilet paper, as it's thicker.

Oh, don't play dumb. Opinion outlets are opinion outlets; I don't care who they are owned by, they all are not news.

Ah, but you do care what Jacobin is owned by -- as it's financed by the masses, while all the media that you support, are owned and have millions pumped into them by billionnaires.

Who then, is the one playing dumb here? And even if you want "news", you could always look at the Catalyst, which is a peer-reviewed journal... made by the Jacobin. You didn't even bother to fact check your own statement.

[Ifreann]

We might also ask what it is that Americans on the left can do about Boko Haram. Are they backed by the US government? Is there a BHPAC that helps secure them funding and weapons from America?

Boko Haram is Nigeria's problem. That said Nigeria is our ally. If they can offer anything in exchange for military assistance in their counter terrorism problem and we find our interests align, the what should happen is self explanatory.

Nigeria is a populous, powerful, influential and wealthy nation. They can handle themselves well enough.

And if Nigeria wants aid they can probably get it from the EU or China more easily than they could get it from the Trump administration.

I'm sure there's fair criticisms that can be made of the left on which international events we pay attention to and which we do not, but "Why aren't you all protesting about the resurgent Boko Haram in Nigeria?" does not cut the mustard. It's just an attempt to deflect questions about Palestine.

[Port Carverton]

Boko Haram is Nigeria's problem. That said Nigeria is our ally. If they can offer anything in exchange for military assistance in their counter terrorism problem and we find our interests align, the what should happen is self explanatory.

Nigeria is a populous, powerful, influential and wealthy nation. They can handle themselves well enough.

And if Nigeria wants aid they can probably get it from the EU or China more easily than they could get it from the Trump administration.

I'm sure there's fair criticisms that can be made of the left on which international events we pay attention to and which we do not, but "Why aren't you all protesting about the resurgent Boko Haram in Nigeria?" does not cut the mustard. It's just an attempt to deflect questions about Palestine.

The EU is... well the EU and China has started to ask massive interest repayments through BRI (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/5/2 ... is-in-2025) (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... tudy-warns). Neither would be a good choice for aid

[Untecna]

Oh, don't play dumb. Opinion outlets are opinion outlets; I don't care who they are owned by, they all are not news.

Ah, but you do care what Jacobin is owned by -- as it's financed by the masses, while all the media that you support, are owned and have millions pumped into them by billionnaires.

Who then, is the one playing dumb here? And even if you want "news", you could always look at the Catalyst, which is a peer-reviewed journal... made by the Jacobin. You didn't even bother to fact check your own statement.

I don't care who Jacobin is owned by, nor something like the National Review. Opinion magazines are opinion magazines, there is not an argument in the world that can change that.

As for your claim about the Catalyst, it is just another opinion piece. It's a publishing center for it, just like any other. Only difference is that it brands itself as more academic. "Peer-reviewed journal" is also not a news publication, go figure.

[Untecna]

That's not quite what I am saying. There is a standard to journalism; whereas anyone with the means can broadcast their own thoughts, journalism involves a process as devoid as it can get in regards to partisanship, and a standard of fact.

Jacobin and it's contemporaries are opinion pieces; they represent only the ideas of the authors, even if those ideas are but their use of lenses over current events. NBC, on the other hand, does not hold any lenses; it cares only for what the exact matter is.

Now, the mere presence of an opinion column in, say, the New York Times does not make it an opinion outlet; that unit, and the news unit, are separate entities. If Jacobin did this, too, then there could be an argument to be made, but alas, they do not.

Boy, if you think NBC doesn't hold any lenses, then you're in for a rude awakening.
The Jacobin has far more of a journalistic standard than any corponews ever could hope to have.

By publishing left-wing opinion pieces in regular magazines.

Listen, I don't give a damn if you like to read Jacobin or not (personally, I have a distaste for opinion publications), but I will draw the line at your assertion that it is "news".

[Imperializt Russia]

How are you defining "opinion", exactly?

I don't read Jacobin myself but you seem to be suggesting that because it doesn't have a staff journalist, it is inherently disqualified as journalism.

Would you say the same about, say, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, or Private Eye (a magazine I have read), or a journalist's personal substack? What makes the cutoff, especially in that latter example?

That's not quite what I am saying. There is a standard to journalism; whereas anyone with the means can broadcast their own thoughts, journalism involves a process as devoid as it can get in regards to partisanship, and a standard of fact.

Jacobin and it's contemporaries are opinion pieces; they represent only the ideas of the authors, even if those ideas are but their use of lenses over current events. NBC, on the other hand, does not hold any lenses; it cares only for what the exact matter is.

Now, the mere presence of an opinion column in, say, the New York Times does not make it an opinion outlet; that unit, and the news unit, are separate entities. If Jacobin did this, too, then there could be an argument to be made, but alas, they do not.

Regardless of the views one may hold about Jacobin's output... to argue that NBC or any other "establishment news organisation" does not have a lens is patently false, and I feel you should know that.

And to be clear, this is not an "MSM all equally bad" post, my sole source of news is the BBC despite its shortcomings in general and my personal negative views on its output.

Aside from that, it really sounds like you're just saying "well, I have mentally filed Jacobin in a column of 'not news' and these establishment media organisations as 'news' because, well, they're the establishment media organisations" which is just an argument to... authority, I guess? You have failed to establish what elevates their output above Jacobin save for "I think Jacobin's model is insufficiently like a major national newsroom". I gave two counter-examples of "non-mainstream news" including the TBIJ which is well regarded, which you did not comment on. I also gave the example of an established journalist's substack, to intentionally blur the line between editorial influence and credibility within one's field.