If you take a step back, there is a lot of hatred generated by much of today's media. I compared it to newspapers from 1970 and the nastiness and the sexism has increased by at least one if not two orders of magnitude. I challenge you to go to your local library or archive and compare for yourself. It's a stark contrast. I compared an entire year's worth of papers, so, I have a good basis to compare.

Here are a few examples of things that did not happen in 1970 in the papers I read and there was nothing like it at all,

The Verge lead a nasty attack on Matt Taylor for wearing a shirt designed by a woman, http://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2014/11/13/7213819/your...

Or, many of the articles about Donald Trump (lunatic is a common term used by some big media outlets, Google it, there are too many links to list). Irrespective of whether you like his policies, the personal attacks (which are even very popular on HN) are unacceptable. To disagree with policy is fine, to personally attack the man is not.

Or try the website equalmeansequal.com . It is very extreme in its gender prejudice and had gone without being challenged. For example, read the section about prisons/incarceration. Like Australia, even when police reports demonstrate there are many violent women (25-33% of perpetrators according to US and Australian statistics such as ABS), there is an almost universal denial in the media about domestic violence and female aggressors. Why? Why condone violence? You can't get much worse in breaching ethics and human rights. Why does it persist so universally?

The linked article at nautilus.us also defends feminism. The central theme to each of these examples above is ... feminism. Feminism does not equal female (nor equality). I currently work with mostly females (about 95%). I'm anti feminist and not anti female! I strongly disrespect prejudiced movements/ideologies (KKK, neo nazis AND feminism).

I also pointed out in another post that Hillary Clinton's exit speech was very sexist (far worse than Matt Taylor's shirt). Why were her segregating words necessary (ie. excluding boys completely in several instances)? Why did every single media outlet ignore this? Feminism. No matter how extreme or nasty, people won't condemn feminism. The absence of protests by almost every single feminist about reporting on domestic violence (or Hillary's sexism) is a clear illustration of the nature of the entire movement.

Feminism is absolutely not the only scourge we have to deal with today, however, it's the only scourge that almost no media outlet will tackle. It's like opposing the KKK 100 years ago.

Until we truly are willing to hold everyone to the same standard, hate speech will thrive. This hate speech often lives under the banner of political correctness. If I had to point 2 fingers at why the media has deteriorated so much compared to 1970, I'd put it down to feminism and political correctness and a refusal to condemn these selective prejudices. The attacks that we see (above) would rarely (if ever) have happened in the Australian media in 1970. However, today, they are the norm.