Many points are covered. How mainstream media covers issues, how they are out to make a profit, how they can't rock the boat.
If you would only take one thing from it, let it be this:
Neutrality is not objectivity.
Not every side of an issue is the same. Not every side of an issue deserves coverage. Giving them equal coverage is equating the lies with the truth.
Here is another thing to consider:
Cenk Uygur is absolutely against corporate media. It is obvious in the issues he raises and he tells them to their faces. Watch however the civility of the discussion. Neither party raises their voices, neither party insults the other. Each hears the other one, each tries to argue their point.
Aside from Shepherd Smith, who at Fox News would be capable of that? Would Charlie Kirk be capable of the same civility? Ben Shapiro? Not going to mention the obvious lunatics because they don't merit a discussion.
@zahlanzi saidThis point gets overlooked far too often. In an attempt to appear neutral, good decent ideas have to compete with crap. The audience has to constantly hear the other side polish their turd version on a given issue. (And its not necessarily left good, right turd either)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aa5_4CK-lz8
Many points are covered. How mainstream media covers issues, how they are out to make a profit, how they can't rock the boat.
If you would only take one thing from it, let it be this:
Neutrality is not objectivity.
Not every side of an issue is the same. Not every side of an issue deserves coverage. Giving them equal coverage is equating the lies with the truth.
But is it any wonder that in not filtering out the fecal matter, the bar got so low, enough people embraced Trump as their savior?