Hacker News Reader

> I wrestle with understanding why most media are anti-Trump and anti-oligarchy,

Who told you they are anti-oligarchy? They are most definitely pro-oligarchy, they are just upset the power is not in their (I mean a person from their peer group) hands. Compare media behavior when the control belongs to "their" and "opposing" party, and you'll see a stark difference.

> and the oligarchs are still able to control those media's use of 'left' and 'right'. How does this work?

They are the oligarchy. Talking heads on TV are part of the system. There's no some struggle to control them and bring them under the toe of the oligarchy - they are a body part of it. Nobody wonders how a man manager to control the fingers of his own hands - it's his hand, of course he controls it.

> I wrestle with understanding why most media are anti-Trump and anti-oligarchy, and the oligarchs are still able to control those media's use of 'left' and 'right'.

Wrestling is a good point here as in it's a show put on for the audience, and Donald Trump was playing a role in it. The idea is that the public left-vs-right in the media etc is a show put on so the people are distracted and don't realize what's going on behind the scenes. The louder the conflict, the better. If I want to relieve you of your wallet, you won't notice the slight touch while I bump into you and create a much stronger sensation by stepping on your toes.

>CNN, MSNBC, and other networks make it perfectly clear they are anti-Trump, in fact most of the media seems to be in agreement with that.

By focusing on how much they hate Trump, what are they not focusing on? What have they all decided has been solved off-screen that you shouldn't worry your head about?

>I mean almost everybody seems to agree that Trump is bad. YouTube and Fox seem to be the exception.

Why are those the positions? And if judging the president was about good governance, how did this split happen across brand lines? And you're saying this as a point _against_ the idea of oligarchs controlling the public discourse?

> By focusing on how much they hate Trump, what are they not focusing on? What have they all decided has been solved off-screen that you shouldn't worry your head about?

I dunno, this almost sounds like an Alex-Jones style conspiracy theory.

What did you think of William Arkin's resignation letter from NBC News?

The idea of deliberate, clear, top-down oligarch manipulation of media is nonsense, I just thought the argument against that hypothetical to be empty. I do not find the lack of editorial consistency across outlets to preclude it. I could just as easily say the strong division around a low number of media sanctioned positions could even suggest the existence of warring factions of oligarchs. But I don't think that either.

I do think lots of small, deliberate and conscious editorial decisions are an evolutionary process that creates giant editorial shifts where none (or few) participants can see the forest for the trees while they're in the middle of it. Only after it's effects are seen does the change come into focus.

> What did you think of William Arkin's resignation letter from NBC News?

Did not see that until now, but I do get bored by the unlimited barrage of anti-Trump articles that some outlets put out. Sometimes I feel like they are just in meetings all day mulling what they can write to put Trump down.

Still don't think lots of small, deliberate and conscious edits are happening. I know various people in the news business, and they would notice if this would be happening.

EDIT: funny tweet that shows how I feel: https://twitter.com/tabytchi/status/1146513236398944256?s=21

Trump is embarrassing, but he has dramatically improved the ability for the wealthy to abuse the poor via policy and regulatory changes.

The very wealthy (and even those of moderate means) genuinely believe they pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and made their own success, completely blind to the fact their incredibly wealthy or successful parents put them there.