Of course, more mainstream media BS. When someone hacks one of their precious "candidates" who loves "freedom", "liberty", and "rights" it's ALWAYS Russia or they frame Assange as a Russian spy. My god I hope the world governments burn. This trash system can't persist anymore.
The thing that I don't understand about this "mainstream media BS" critique is this:
You say that the media is biased in its reporting, beholden to special interests, and doesn't abide by journalistic standards. Given that, the reasonable solution would be to create a media outlet that makes a conscious effort to be less biased, more open about its ties to any industry or other backer, and more stringent about its journalism.
When I go to Breitbart (or any other alt-right news site), I don't see any of that. I see a new breed of media outlets that are even more blatantly biased, even more covert about who's paying them, with no semblance of journalistic integrity.
It's like the alt-right looks at a problem and says: "They are doing X, and we oppose that. We must start outdoing them in X!"
By the way, that approach is typical of organizations that strive simultaneously for both ideological purity and brutal pragmatism. The Bolsheviks did essentially the same. "We hate the Czar's secret police. [One year later...] We need a stronger secret police than anyone else." (Maybe the overlap in methods is no coincidence. Steve Bannon reportedly said he is a Leninist who wants to destroy the state.)
> You say that the media is biased in its reporting, beholden to special interests, and doesn't abide by journalistic standards. Given that, the reasonable solution would be to create a media outlet that makes a conscious effort to be less biased, more open about its ties to any industry or other backer, and more stringent about its journalism.
Not the person you're replying to, and aside from the issue of alt-right news sites (which I know is the main thing you're talking about), lets not forget that (aside from government-run media) the media is a business, and has to do things that are financially viable. They can't just do whatever they'd ideally like to do.
So who do you think is behind it and/or why do you think it couldn't be related to Russia? (I have no knowledge about this situation, I'm just asking you to back up your claims).
