this is an important point and mirrors a similar argument I've seen about why this stuff is convincingpic.twitter.com/to7XbZVjXF
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
misrepresenting facts/events, reporting on some types of things but not others, and so forth in service to an agenda
I wouldn't characterize it as pushing an agenda (implying willfulness, knowing deceit) but rather embodying a worldview. like the scorpion following his nature
but the results are similar and I don't think the characterization of the results is too inaccurate. but that's not the point
the reason the silly conspiracizing, zany alarmism, incredible attention deficiency etc that defines fox/breitbart/etc is so popular is because it fills a void
libs are right that those outlets are *less true* than their own. the appeal of them is that they *feel* right
the sense that "the liberal media is constantly lying to push an agenda" (let's call this msmism because it's shorter and looks funny) is more commonly sensed than known
it's felt as a dissonance between information versus common sense, intuition, lived experience etc. this is probably a common feeling anywhere re: all but the most skillful propaganda
what outlets like fox/breitbart/infowars and the whole constellation of media/internet personalities in that vein do to varying degrees is *resolve dissonance*
it just so happens that they resolve it mostly with bullshit, but that's incidental rather than essential. the effect could be achieved by other means
(mostly it's done this way because it's easy, and most "right" outlets are more mercenary business than their lib counterparts. fox can't be said to have an "ethos" like nyt/wapo do
breitbart sorta does but it's incoherent, and as an outlet it's more akin to like vox or alternet than the grey lady--it's not an institution)
I vaguely remember media people smugposting on election night because the trump hq had I think the nyt live update map up on the big screen instead of fox or whatever
along the lines of "oh yea when you actually need news to be reliable you know our outlets are better than yours"
but that's the sort of thing I *would* expect an organization like nyt to be highly (relative to competitors) reliable on, and a completely separate concern from agenda/worldview issue
imo it would be entirely possible to build a right-wing media institution/ecosystem that is comparably reliable to nyt on things nyt is reliable on, but which resolves msmism dissonance
the important thing is to have a coherent ethos that inspires participants in the endeavor, one that incentivizes reliability/integrity and also fulfillment of purpose
ethos becomes the basis from which one constructs a counternarrative which resolves dissonance without sacrificing grounding in reality
it's easy for libs to dismiss fox et al on factual grounds because fox is stupid. you know you succeeded when you replicate msmism in them
where all the factual ducks seem to be in order but the conclusions inspire an intangible sense of dread and wrongness, like their media does to the other half
for obvious reasons (the entire ecosystem is unwinding lol) I can't say I would recommend founding a media institution in the current year but
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.