Me, the worm has really changed – at least on the way. It wasn't long ago that conservatives lamented that “mainstream” media “controlled the story.” In fact, in 2011, Professor Tim Grossecross estimated that “media bias increases the Democratic candidates by a typical election by about 8-10 points.” But now, the former “mainstream” media is not so mainstream. The new media, typical of podcaster King Joe Rogan and British comedian Russell Brand, boasts an audience that is now warping the audience of the Alphabet Network Show. So now the lament is different:
“Rights control the story!” warning so many leftists.
But are they right? Perhaps even more important, is it correct for “right” “as opposed to the left”?
For examples of teeth gnashing, consider articles written by political strategist Waleed Shahid and commentator Francesca Fiorentini. Today, the pair writing on Substack states that the search for Logan on the left is “misguided.” That's also correct. but…
Do we know our left from our rights?
I'll write in the first paragraph from Waleed and Fiorentini (which will now be called “Stackers”).
Recent media issues studies have confirmed that many people have long suspected. Right-wing media is thoroughly colonized by the digital entertainment ecosystem. Whether it's a comedy, sports or a long form podcast, conservative voices dominate. Nine of the 10 most followed online shows that figures like Joe Rogan, Theophone and Charlie Kirk are leading viewers who are warping their progressive counterparts. Rights not only win media wars, they also set the topography of politics.
The stacker then provides the following chart: This is a round on the internet.
But as the tweeter above essentially states, the analysis is gentle. Some examples: Logan was always a left-leaning libertarian. He approved socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 2020. Comedian Theo Fon was a Democrat who also supported Sanders. And until Jordan Peterson was a relatively unknown professor of Canadian psychology, making him famous for his brave defense from the attacks on pronoun politics. He was never “right wing.” If he had been there, he probably wouldn't have survived in Canadian academia.
The point is that none of these men have a path to Damascus or are painted red. Like Elon Musk, they are only alienated by the now radical left wing that destroys those who reject that toxic Kool-Aid. Certainly, some of their views may have changed. But the real reason they are more sympathetic to “right” now is that they currently have a large tent. In contrast, on the left is the big cancel culture gulag.
What's right or is it right…
But the really, deeper problem is that the right/left paradigm is a poor way to define the problem. It is the product of relativism. Furthermore, there is a lack of spectra of totalitarian/anarchy, the proposed alternative. Let's clarify the problem briefly.
The political sense of the terms “left” and “right” came from the French Revolution (1789). They correspond to “liberal” and “conservative” respectively. And they are all tentative terms in a commonly used way. The only consistent definition of “liberal” is the “desire to change the status quo.” A consistent definition of “conservative” is “the desire to maintain the status quo.” Therefore, as the status quo changes, the political spectrum is similarly labelled as “liberal” and “conservative.”
So, in the lands of Che Guevara and Polpot, yes, Logan, Von and Peterson are “right wings” and very right wings. But this doesn't make much sense. what? The only important distinction: truth vs. falsehood.
There is only the truth and everything else – and everything else is a lie. Understanding this is a number of prerequisites below:
Forest for trees
Now the stacker observes. “The right-wing media doesn't respond to Republicans, and that defines it,” they say. “People like Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk don't wait for the RNC's story points. They create them.”
“The conservative media doesn't spend time protecting the establishment of a GOP. It puts pressure on it and drags you into action,” they add. “In contrast, progressive media remains trapped in a reactive, defensive attitude, often litigating GOP stories rather than their own settings.”
In fact, Stacker also complains, “too many progressive media projects act as de facto DNC proxy, creating content that enhances existing democratic narratives.” They often act “as a shield for democratic elites, reluctant to criticize party leaders.”
This may be that, “Thank you, Captain is obvious.” Stacker describes the “Hive Mind” in which collectivists are displayed on the left. Of course, it is also important to consider that the left-wing talking head may actually be paid to promote the DNC line. Anyway, this phenomenon is in contrast to what many call RWM™ “individualism” (right-wing media. Thus, stylized due to the inaccuracy of the term). However, there is a deeper phenomenon in work.
There are two ways to echo Gk Chesterton: This is by the rules or by the ruler. This means that you can first determine the issues related to the truth. But, like Protagora, if you believe that “a person is a measure of everything,” you judge the problem by comparing it to others.
For example, when RWM™ defeats GOP POOBAHS and defeats their own path, it's not their own.
It's true – it belongs to God.
The difference of that god
Commentators disposed of in this way have no problem ignoring Republican facilities. Because, although it wields worldly power, it pales in comparison to its highest power.
In contrast, the left of the media is core and relativistic, with only other people (society) as a framework of reference. Of course, they spend their time “litigating the GOP story.” (And their own stories, for example, girls' sports boys, stinks.) Remember that liberalism is about attacking the status quo supported by others. And of course, the media's left wing spends time echoing the DNC narratives proposed by others who control the most powerful entities with the secular gaze of the media type. It is the closest thing they have to God, and sometimes their “God.” It is also difficult to oppose “God.”
There can be more to be said. However, the final memo depicts Stacker as benefiting from some type of institutional advantage. They also mention RWM™'s “billionaire donors.” However, first note that most politically active billionaires are on the left. Second, this dominant RWM™ has risen to the forefront over the past decade or so, and has become a period of intense censorship for the left. It flourishes for one reason, only one reason.
It is truly the media of people, guided by people, and for people, and in its purest form by something much larger.
