this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
226 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19133 readers
6987 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 53 points 2 weeks ago

The owner is South African.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They should have run the endorsement anyway and forced the asshat South African to fire them.

[–] faltryka@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Both the idea of a newspaper endorsing a political candidate, and someone possessing enough wealth to shape the information most people receive, suck.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 30 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think it's okay to have opinion pieces in media as long as it is labeled as such with "editorial" for example. That's a part of democracy, not every media needs to be as neutral as Reuters and AFP.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah editorials are fine, but they need to be marked that way. Most media outlets claiming they are "news" nowadays are primarily editorial in nature, and don't specify that anywhere.

How many hours a day do channels like Fox News actually have news segments versus all the editorial opinion shows? At what point should they no longer be allowed to claim they are a "news" channel or paper?

[–] Bookmeat@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

This is only a problem when there are three media companies.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

The idea of a newspaper endorsing a political candidate is a long standing tradition.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/political-newspaper-endorsements-history-and-outcome/

[–] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Under normal circumstances, I might agree. But these are not normal circumstances. Advocate of rights such as free speech will often stand in opposition to fascist authoritarianism. Today should be no different.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

Weeeaahh but i can find noooo proooof that media owners support truuuuump

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 weeks ago

I have a family member who just cancelled their subscription to the LA Times over this. After having been a subscriber for decades and continuing to be a subscriber to "maybe slow the decline of traditional journalism" for the past years since its quality has severely declined, they just said,"Well, that did it."

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago