It's been under control by a maga dipshit for a few years now. They lost any credibility they might have had
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
11064 readers
188 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Even before that, CNN had been the milquetoast indecisive news source that nobody wanted.
Social media is so toxic, we should all get off it and just go back to relying on institutions like CNN for our perception of the world!
..........
The correct solution is to completely avoid TV news and social media. I realize Beehaw is social-media-adjacent, but it's not the firehose of the big players.
TV news in the U.S. hasn't been in the same fucking area code as "news" for decades. There are exceptions, such as PBS, but you otherwise need to leave the country for quality sourcing -- such as DW, the BBC and Al-Jazeera.
The correct solution is to not have a moral panic about social media that plays into the hands of rich radical conservatives who own said social media platforms and are purposefully driving the moral panic and rightwing toxicity.
Two things can be bad at the same time. Social media is problematic because people are monetarily incentivized to get attention. Corporate news outlets are problematic because of the same reason.
The correct solution is improved media literacy and actual consequences for the harm that people do. And maybe a correction to the incentive structure for news while we're at it.
Framing it as "moral panic" is disingenuous. It's just people who love money more than community having found a way to exert control by distracting from what's actually going on.
I agree in a sense buy I am not invested in framing it as a moral panic I am just pointing out the fact that it is clearly a moral panic.
According to whom? If this is "clearly" the case, how am I unaware of it?
Have you heard of a place called Australia before?
Mate, I've been to Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Adelaide.