Read on Twitter
There have been a long spree of reporters tweeting this while leaving out the very next line, that she is referring to people who ignored immigration abuses under Obama. Such a long spree after so many people correcting them that it seems like it& #39;s intentional. https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1311863647107416064">https://twitter.com/Yamiche/s...
You can have a press that& #39;s super adversarial towards people in power -- republican, democrat, whatever -- and retain the public trust but having a hyper-partisan press is a recipe for delegitimization.
Furthermore because these reporters are acting like political operatives, they& #39;re making people more scared, anxious, and contemptuous of the other side and making polarization worse. You would *want* the president+admin to be less extreme. They want them to be *more extreme*
Because the more extreme your claim, the more clicks, views, shares, book deals, TV appearances you get. The whole thing is set up that way...
It& #39;s also a cycle -- by giving Trump so much more exposure than the other candidates in 2015-2016, they fed tons of fear/anxiety into the public. Now, they learned how much that sells and just amp it up in any other way possible.
If Trump loses the election, I imagine a lot of these networks will find fringe actors on the right and amp up their presence+threat level beyond whatever it rationally poses for the same reason, fear/anxiety sells.
People on the conservative side will view them as basically acting as political operatives for the Democrats, which is true to some extent, but a big part of the underlying motivation is they looked at what News Corp did for years and realized it makes huge amounts of money.
Zucker discovered Trump, elevated Trump, Trump& #39;s elected, now Zucker has a network that tells you Trump is going to end the world every single day, because every chain in that series of events makes $.
