By Z…(that’s my BYLINE!)

When I saw the cartoon below, I thought it was cute but, also, so true…we all know this, of course.

Even the L.A. Times used to have a wonderful Editorial page on which there were both sides of a same subject on the page….OPINION  The Dems on the LEFT side of the page, the Reps on the RIGHT side. (we’re always on the RIGHT SIDE, of course :))

My feeling for years has been that the amazingly  left wing, one-sided representation of news started around the time everyone suddenly got BYLINES…and, along with that, OPINIONS.  Before that, we got real facts (mostly), truth….just the way things were on any given subject.  “This happened, then that happened……and this might be the outcome” …BUT give a writer his NAME on something and………stand back! 

CAN WE GET BACK?  CAN WE EVEN HOPE ‘JUST THE FACTS’ WILL EVER BE GIVEN AGAIN….WITHOUT AN OPINION, RIGHT OR LEFT?    People like Wm Buckley were right wing and wrote……..there are still very good right wing writers but not many in the biggest, most read papers, let’s face it.   WHY DID THE RIGHT NOT STAND UP AND STRESS THEIR OPINIONS LIKE THE LEFT HAS?  And is that as important as FACTS, please……………NO OPINION AT ALL?  

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to By Z…(that’s my BYLINE!)

  1. Mustang says:

    By the time of the president’s inauguration, the press almost universally described him in glowing terms; he’d won the war, after all. But at the end of his first term in office, and the beginning of his second, the press had flipped completely 180 degrees. They found fault with George Washington’s domestic and foreign policy, and then soon after that, his personal integrity, his republican principles — and even his war record, if you can believe it. Almost all of these “press attacks” eventually backfired, but a good and decent man had been wounded and the institution of the press sullied forever. Even until today.

    The number of partisan newspapers exploded during Adams’ presidency — and later. There were 50 newspapers in the 13 states in 1776 — but 250 by the year 1800. It has only gone downhill since then. In 1792, Thomas Jefferson, a disgruntled member of the Washington administration, learned how easy it was to gut a president in the press. He denied it, at the time, but it turns out that all of the press attacks on General Washington were Jefferson’s doing … anonymously.

    So, I believe there is nothing going on today that hasn’t been the standard almost from the beginning of the country. What has changed, since 1947, is the place from which the press exercises its power. In 1947, the American press had a prominent role — now it has become a preeminent role in determining how we think, politically. They know it, many of us know it, but many more (even if they sense it) believe that if they hear it on CNN, then it must be true. I believe what you are saying today is absolutely true — I simply think that it isn’t a new phenomenon. You ask, “Can we get back?” Get back to what point? Do you mean to get back to when Thomas Jefferson sliced and diced one of the more decent men this country ever produced — and got away with it?

    One short addition: like you, I just want the facts. But even though most newspapers have an opinion section, prominently labeled as OPINION, people digest those opinions as facts. That’s not a newspaper problem — it’s an “under-educated reader” problem.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. kidme37 says:

    No, the people are too polarized. The left is not interested in anything the right has to say.

    Like

  3. kidme37 says:

    Concerning the Left and Right, you may find this explanation interesting. You can also subscribe to this site as the articles are usually interesting and informative.

    https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2022/06/how-did-the-practice-of-calling-liberals-left-and-conservatives-right-start/

    Like

  4. geeez2014 says:

    KID, that Left/Right link is very interesting, and well written, article…thanks. I agree with it; And yes, at least in Germany, while living there, I saw that the “Right” is “lefter” than most “Rights’….!
    And I absolutely stand by the author’s premise that the Right favored the upper classes and why I stand for that today is that I believe it’s those upper classes supporting and paying for what the Left thinks is so important and gallant; freebies. Without the corporations the Left and some here think are so bad, we wouldn’t have much. (part of what I’ve always said is Capitalism needing Goodness, not taking advantage of the working classes.)

    And I did know the news in Lincoln’s time was REALLY REALLY rough… Why we can’t shut truly fake news down is then you’re called ugly names by the Left, which supports fake news but will never cop to it. On Facebook, I constantly see political posts deleted or with a new FB warning that they fact checked and “this isn’t true”….Yesterday, I commented “I’ve never seen a leftwing fact check by FB!” Got tons of comments agreeing with me.

    And, probably, you’re right…The Left REALLY has no desire to hear another side. PERIOD…..
    Even AOC, after being caught so obviously posing as if her hands were cuffed the other day, denied it “WHY would i DO that”?(when it’s caught on video!) and said how nasty Republicans just come up with ways to divert from the important topics of the day. Astonishing. The great thing is that , while I’m sure you don’t agree, even some Democrats saw her obviously faking and then blaming Republicans and they might not change but they do get it.

    And yes, MUSTANG>..A nasty press is not new in America…or anywhere else…..
    I don’t mean “Back” to the earliest history of the horrid press in Jackson and Lincoln’s and Washington’s days! I’m very well aware of that…
    I’m not sure how anyone can believe the reporters today are even half trying to present both sides of anything……But, as I clearly wrote in my post, there were times when both sides were given the opportunity and were respected…as in the LA Times OPINION PAGE I mentioned. That’s the “Back” I wish we could get back to…. Watergate kind of changed all that, but we’d had respect in the media from both sides…. There was RESPECT even on shows like John McLaughlin’s…even FOX’s “The Five” has a leftwinger on every day and there’s respect; we don’t see that much on any Left venue…..Let’s see how the new management of the NY Times changes, as promised…there are slight movements but not much…not yet. One NY Times author, Brett Stephens, has even apologized for several things. Yes, he was known as a conservative but he, along with many others like JOnah GOldberg and others, changed because of contempt for Trump and other things.

    But, alas…BYLINES…EVERYBODY not only writes but, now that his/her name is there, can give an OPINION….I distinctly remember when we suddenly saw the names of writers, maybe in the Sixties?, not just for those like Buckley and Vidal pieces written by bigwigs in politics from both sides who’d earned a byline, I mean every little bit of information from the lowliest writer…..with a BYLINE one is tempted to add his LINE of thinking……..and then we were off to the races.

    People would be much better educated if they did just get facts.

    Like

  5. Baysider says:

    Interesting idea about when names are signed. On the one hand, people love their moment of fame. On the other, anonymous posters feel freer to let fly. I actually subscribed to the NYT at one point, but as their editorials crept onto the front page disguised as news I stopped. I think that had been going on for a long time. It’s as blatant as your comic graphic now. It’s also key what does NOT get mentioned. Blockbuster newsworthy material shunted into silent shadows. Walter Cronkite and his crowd – ooh, the king of that technique. Lying by artful omission.

    Plus what Kid said. The left has energized their practice of shutting down all voices but their own in the last 2 years. They’ve been practicing for years. It was instructional to see how the left/authoritarian side moved swiftly to cut off disagreement with them. That energized both sides, from the dippy New Zealand PM who said “we are your source of truth” [and none other as she ploughed ahead to cut off ALL debate] to scientists like Robert Malone and Peter McCullough who stepped out of the shadows and kept standing and expanding their fact inventory hit after hit — giving us courage too.

    There has never been a time when this did not happen. Men are still men. Does it seem so sharp to us perhaps because we have that idea of “freedom of expression” written into our constitution and etched in our DNA?

    Like

  6. geeez2014 says:

    BAYSIDER…. Just wanted to make clear we all know there hasn’t been a time this did not happen, but if NOBODY here remembers the more respectful disagreements, articles written with truth and some semblance of ‘evidence’ for the opinions of writers, you weren’t reading what I was. Even in a Buckley/Vidal debate, they were VERY tough and VERY respectful, and TOUGH and not much lying going on, or making the other feel like dirt like left wingers do today.
    NEVER have we seen such ugliness, such disdain from either party , not in the last 50 years or so. But I’m well aware of the news in Lincoln’s, Jackson’s., etc days…very rough…OUtrageous, frankly…. We’re here again……

    And while anonymous writers (I’m talking strictly journalists in big-name papers, etc. here not ‘posters’ like on blogs) can hide in their anonymity they don’t usually need or want to, and they get great kudos ( and more $$) FROM the Left for their left wing opinions under their names,

    …Thankfully, we have the NY Post and WSJ and a few others (I’m talking mainstream not blogs) , which do mostly have conservative opinions.both of which have come down VERY hard Trump in the last few days,interestingly enough, the Post even adding “he should never be allowed to hold office again” because he never tried to stop the 1/6 situation, and more……….) but we DO have them. and they’re USUALLY more conservative!!!!!

    I’m very surprised nobody’s seeing the HUGE growth in vileness, outrageous mischaracterizations and blatant lies these days….the cartoonist here sees the news is one sided, anyway! ..Look for any info on the totally open southern border some time on liberal papers……good luck finding it. Did any of you see the NY Times piece on Ivana Trump’s life? SO SO subtly insulting…NOTHING you could put your finger on, but it was THERE, it was a masterful hit job….Things like the border silence wouldn’t have happened 40, 50 years ago. I”m rather surprised. And heartened! Maybe you’re all reading something I’m not seeing!? 🙂 We’ve talked about the awful media here forever, since it’s my major thrust of my blog….and we’ve always agreed it’s WORSE NOW!!

    Like

  7. Baysider says:

    Well … we are a long way from the Oxford debates. The swift moves to cut off others as a cranky driver is now, yes, more blatant and caustic. We have “other” sources – good. The MSM has exposed themselves as unreliable to many. Also good.

    I’m not sure the border silence would not have happened years ago. Maybe not on that subject – but a similar wall of silence went up. A lot got covered up. I’m finishing a book on this now that has dug so much out of the records of letters, memos and memoirs. LOTS covered up, ignored, and even physically removed from the record when the next generation began sniffing around. The open viciousness is worse.

    Like

  8. Baysider says:

    Thinking on this in my workout. Does humility have a role here? I think so. Working on that thought.

    Like

  9. geeez2014 says:

    BAYSIDER..>GREAT point that we do have other options…exactly.
    Not sure about OXFORD, but we here in America had a lot of great REALLY GREAT Buckley/Gore debates, too….I’d LOVE to hear one today; SO MUCH!

    “The open viciousness is worse.” Thanks….I don’t like being argumentative but it’s fun to toss these things around and I couldn’t understand how my readers here didn’t agree that things are worse….YES, they were REALLY vicious with Lincoln, Mrs. Jackson, etc., but fairly ‘calm’ for years….”FAIRLY”…..but OH, they are VICIOUS now and SO OPENLY VICIOUS. Right!!!

    HUMILITY…..tell me .

    Like

  10. Baysider says:

    “I’d LOVE to hear one today.” YouTube is your friend. One of my favorites for your viewing pleasure:

    Firing Line w/ Thomas Sowell “The Economic Lot of Minorities”

    My favorite part is where the opponent lectures Tom and Bill on what “people in Harlem need” and Tom interrupts her “well I grew up in Harlem, and” you’re wrong. 🙂

    Humility thoughts: “a modest or low view of one’s own importance”
    Maybe associated with being less shrill, more even-handed, less of a pugilist. A person of modesty and sense of self as not the highest end all and be all. Would this kind of person be the vindictive, officious, meddler that characterizes the mean left? I think humility is valued less and less in a culture that held it as virtuous 2 generations ago.

    Like

  11. bocopro says:

    The 3rd-millennium reality seems to be that truth is tedious, print is passé, good grammar is racist, and punctuation is overrated.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s