I'm sorry to say that I don't see any possibility for strengthening local news in places where trust has been lost. Local news media are disappearing fast, and those remaining are largely owned by venture capital firms that are at least as profit-focused as national media ownership (if not by politically motivated corporations, such as Sinclair, that do not deserve and have no interest in earning deserved trust).
I also don't see any connection between the hope that local news can rebuild community and trust and the role of Substack blogs, which are anything but local, and which are especially subject to becoming political echo chambers.
I agree fully that strengthening conscientious local news and maximizing sane independent voices on Substack are good things. But if the project of the moment is to develop a long-term strategy for freeing the country of toxic disinformation, incompetence, and authoritarianism, I think we need to discover better leverage opportunities than these. Optimism is motivating but not helpful if it's not well grounded.
Are we certain that in this environment substack will continue to exist? If TikTok can be threatened and closed for national security, what will keep other platforms open if they are declared threats? don’t think that our government isn’t looking at how media is controlled in other dictatorships and learning how to do that here!
I did not want to utter these words of yours, but now that "the horse is out of the barn" — Unknown... I would be the first to say that I don't have a clue. That said, now is probably a good time to share our thoughts before they are extinguished! I'm going to quote from Jim Acosta's farewell message from CNN.
1) It is never a good time to bow-down to a tyrant. — Raul Castro
2) "Don't give-in to the lies; don't give-in to the fear; and hold-on to the truth and to hope." — Jim Acosta
Tik Tok is a Chinese Espionage tool...this substack isnt...I will say some sacrifice truth so they don't appear partisan...and that is what causes lost of trust
With all due respect to Chuck Todd, he is showing profound naiveté in his statement that “The media has a lot of work to do to win back the trust of viewers/listeners/readers” .
The reason why “the media” has lost trust of “viewers/listener/ readers” is the over thee decade attack from right wingers that had it’s start when Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich darkened our doorstep, assisted by the well funded megaphone of Fox “News” which brought their vile demagoguery into the mainstream.
Fox “News” is nothing more than a propaganda outlet for radical right wing ideology with the goal of imposing right wing authoritarianism straight out of the old Soviet Union playbook
This relentless (and almost all DEEPLY dishonest) smearing and demagogic effort to marginalize and demonize facts and truth (read: “the media”) that is outside the radical right wing has been largely successful to the detriment of this country’s democracy.
No, Mr. Todd, the fault of lack of “trust” is not because of anything the “media” did. They were easy marks to unprincipled lairs.
The media's own principles, standards and dedication to reporting as accurately as they can is no match for shrill, dishonest propagandists and a shrewd con-man in Donald Trump who’s shameless lying feeds the cult that was cultivated by years of Rush, Newt and Fox “News” which is now made even stronger and more lethal with the easy disinformation megaphone know as social media and podcasts that uses the free distribution pipeline of the internet to spread their toxic bullshit.
Dave, I have to respectfully disagree. Conservatives say the exact same thing about MSNBC and CNN. They say the radical left wing media is destroying democracy. As a result, trust in media is at an all time low, and I promise you 2 years from now it will be even lower. No one network/newspaper caused this, collectively they did. It wasn’t Fox and the WSJ anymore than it was CNN and the NYT. Until enough people recognize this, we are going to continue to unravel as a country.
Fox continually makes up stories and traffics in disinformation, even went to court to preserve their right to knowingly lie to their viewers. that's the difference
True, other media outlets do too. Bad reporting on Covid. Bad reporting on trans issues. Going all in on being anti-Trump. Even the eating the dogs story which yes was a dumb thing to say. But the press in their frenzy to make Trump look bad missed the story about immigration and the Biden administration being much more open to asylum seekers and interpreters other laws as liberally as possible to let people in. The press carried water for the Democrats and tersely said it’s legal. Like they were supreme court justices. They’re not, they are supposed to be informing peoples with the whole truth not being advocates for a single party.
Immigration was probably the biggest single issue in the election.
Great piece and an example of why, as a more conservative reader, I am paying to follow you. Your comment about national media will probably never regain trust is spot on. Once trust is lost it is incredibly hard to regain it. Second, I strongly agree with your/Chuck’s comments about community. Even though I don’t agree with every you write, I am part of the community you have created. Finally, people need to stop following only people that think like they do. Diversify of thought, IMO, is the most important one. I seriously have not watched one network news station (including Fox) for 10 years. I have not read one newspaper in about 8 years. They lost my trust and will never get it back. I gladly pay 7 subscriptions on Substack and am an active follower of about 150 people on X. I feel like I am more informed then the shrinking number of people still following MSM. Again…great piece…thank you.
To reference one of your recent posts, I agree with about 72% of it.
But, more seriously - he's not wrong. In your questions yesterday there was a post about building a left-wing ecosphere to compete against the right. It was a Dem talking head on CNN a couple of weeks back who pointed out that the MSM largely excluded conservative voices so they had to build their own model. I'm sure there was a point when the MSM was more balanced (not in my lifetime) and that's likely when trust is media was much higher - when either group lives in an echo chamber, the path to crazy town is an express highway.
What I (and I'm guessing many who subscribe) appreciate is that you give us your honest takes and aren't just searching for clicks. There are plenty of wild people on all side but the cacophony of views are what challenge us and get us to better evaluate our own.
Given that your Substack is a business, it's a challenge to balance revenue and objectivity (real & perceived). You noted yesterday about potential "bundles" down the line. Eventually, I can see sponsorships & paid partnerships. So, we wish you, Chuck and others continued growth and opportunities but be careful you don't become what you're leaving.
Keep up the great work. Always appreciate your insights - even when I don't agree.
This is pretty much in accord with my opinion, though much more balanced & well written than the cynical thoughts in my head.
The fact that these talented folks are all having epiphanies in the face of industry upheaval makes me wonder how their objectivity and integrity were previously compromised by generous paychecks.
No one should miss Chuck's last podcast with Marty Baron. It is a great discussion on media and where it is going.
One point that really hit home to me is Chuck's comment about Substack and similar outlets. The fact that at $60 - $80 a pop per year, there is no way any one individual can afford to subscribe to the journalists that they used to get from a few major sources. In order to be economically viable, you are going to need to consolidate into The Bulwark or similar groups to make your journalism affordable.
As to local news, there is an experiment going on here in Minnesota. The Star Tribune has set up a Foundation for local news and is working to fund it themselves and through the Foundation. It's only at the beginning, but it looks promising. The reason I gave the Foundation money is that our local newspapers went out of business and even though I live in the Twin Cities metro, I relied on the local newspaper to cover the local news (i.e., city council meetings, events, school district meetings, etc.). That is now gone and nothing replaced it. I have been pushing the Star Tribune to expand their Web site to cover local news all over the state rather than cherry picking a couple of stories, Create whole pages devoted to local regions and let all of the news be populated there. The paper can still cherry pick, but at least we would have somewhere to go for more of our local news.
I worry though, about the economics of Substack. Each subscription is $5-10, but you can subscribe to large outfits for similar or a little more that give you dozens of stories every day.
I came here to make precisely the same comment. Ultimately it results in the same problem because human nature says that most people aren’t going to pay money to read things that they disagree with.
What happens to businesses whose models don’t work anymore? They change. Remember William Randolph Hearst? Ofc not! Major conservative MSMer against FDR. But they changed and today Hearst Media probably owns your local TV station!
Twitter was never Revenue positive, it was a terrible economic investment, but everyone touted it as ‘the town square.’ Reddit and Substack may disrupt and will have staying power just as Twitter/X does….but MSM will in some way remain.
Substack is going to have to figure out their revenue model and you will see ads at some point. A purely creator driven marketplace where a percentage is taken from each sub is unsustainable, as we can see from cable TV’s subscription drop.
I agree with Chucks point on local media but am not smart enough to envision the environment where robust local journalism prospers. Local newspapers are in the hand of Private Equity and by and large local TV is corporately owned. I am sure there is an answer but it is not readily apparent to me.
I'm not from NJ but still sad to see. There are no easy solutions to it. The internet is a wonderful thing but some of the collateral damage to things like this are a significant loss. Not sure how it's "fixed" or replaced but hopefully someone figures it out.
Chris, this is the time for independent voices who report the truth and the states. It’s important to distinguish individuals who report the world around them in real time and the media who get some kind of remuneration for doing that. I’m sorry to say that paid journalism is open to corruption. I know that is the way many writers make a living. But you just can’t trust them unless it’s transparent exactly where that funding is coming from.
So those who use Substack should perhaps prioritize the free writing available in spades here.
As for the states, the blue ones specifically, are leading the attack on the out of control federal government. Not the political parties. Not the Democrats in Congress. So thank the founders for that model.
That’s where our republic is going. It’s a straight fight between the states and the federal government for control of the United States. The states are likely to win in my opinion. We will see.
I’m in agreement. Here’s the rub: too many local affiliates are owned by the larger media conglomerates. Thus they get ‘copy’ that is exactly what the other stations are producing and then airing it in exactly the same order with cookie cutter reporters. (Although in Sacramento local location reporters are POC!) Companies like Sinclair, McClatchy, and Murdoch have done to local news what they did to newspapers, cable news, and social media. Hopefully, Substack with all its variety, can withstand the oligarchs and their control.
These comments about “local” news are evidence of an *extreme* ignorance of the current ownership of “local” stations. I keep on writing this and it seems to get missed, but having worked 45 tears selling high-technology software/hardware to the Media & Entertainment industry, it was my job, in order to close sales, to find out who was at the top of the “approvals” and get to them directly. I know who owns what (or at least, I DID, until I retired 14 months ago…).
Sinclair Broadcast Group owns 200+ TV stations, and in fact own multiple properties in each of the major media markets. Their rightwing billionaire owners make sure that corporate “copy” is distributed and read on air at every single one of their “local” stations. You can’t trust those “local” stations.
iHeart Media own 800+ radio stations, again, with multiples in every major media market, and they “report” what their rightwing billionaires want reported. Even though Americans are fairly close to evenly split between the left and right sides of the political spectrum (obviously it shifts slightly over time…), why is it that the airwaves are thick with rightwing talk radio but there’s virtually *nothing* that gives voice to the left side of politics on the air? It’s, once again, the predominance of rightwing media owners.
Wake up, people! This “left leaning MSM” meme couldn’t be MORE incorrect in 2025, but likely hasn’t been true for many decades, back when the FCC ended the Fairness Doctrine and ended the prohibition of corporations only owning a single station in each market.
Sorry, Chuck Todd, but “local” news isn’t going to save us. In fact, it’s the most intractable of problems in regards to “regaining trust”.
I can remember the days that I believed Chuck Todd was an honorable moderator on MTP. I stopped watching & listening to him when he gave Ron Johnson of Wisconsin a pass on a blatant lie (during Trump 1.0) which today, among all of the lies I don’t even remember which one it was. MTP & NBC have lost their compass. I wish him well but I hope he finds his spine & goes back to holding people accountable.
Totally agree. I used to enjoy the Sunday morning talk shows until they devolved into GQP propagandists and sane-washed the hell out of ConOLD.
Chuck had a lot to do with that. He was never even close to being as good as Tim Russert who actually pushed back against lies and non answers to questions.
I need news: local, national and international. But as a full time business owner, parent, spouse, exerciser and hopefully squeezing in some me time, I only have so much bandwidth (time wise, emotional, and $). So whether it’s newspapers, podcasts, Substack, TV — I only have so much capacity. This means I have to figure out the most trustworthy sources to receive and understand the news.
For local, as a person born and raised in the Puget Sound region, I subscribe to the Seattle Times and Tacoma News Tribune. Yes I have concerns about ownership, and am saddened with the decline in size of the newspapers, but there is no better source of local journalism so I subscribe both digitally and, yes, to the Sunday paper. I encourage everyone to do the same and tell all your friends you do it. Here’s a good piece from Pew on local news: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2024/05/07/americans-changing-relationship-with-local-news/
For national and International news, I sub to the NYT and Atlantic. These and other publications sometimes break my trust, but overall they earn it and I have to know what’s going on. There’s more I would like to subscribe to, but… I only have so much bandwidth.
Cable news for me took a trust hit when it morphed from reporting the hard news to opinion and entertainment. I still watch it sometimes especially when there is a major story. But not that often, frankly.
Right now I support with my time and my money two people in independent media and Chris is one of them. I have followed you Chris since The Fix days. I simply do not have the capacity time wise to support more although I would like to. Take podcasts, for instance. I think they are great! I just don’t have the time unless I have a few minutes while driving. While I consume most of your content, I can’t consume all of it because I just don’t have the bandwidth.
I support Chris for his unvarnished, unbiased, objective, professional, educated, experienced, timely and reliable reporting (journalism!) ON the news, and because he helps me understand what it means and where we’re going. I help my clients make decisions by fully informing them so they can make informed conclusions and decisions. This is what Chris does for me. No journalist is infallible, but I have found Chris’s reporting to be helpful and reliable for years. And hell he comes with personality, authenticity and humor which I can surely use.
I need the deeply sourced NYT stories on this administration’s shenanigans, and I need Chris to help me understand it all.
With Trump rapidly destroying the country and half the country not paying attention or not accessing reliable media we are so screwed. I don't what the answer is in the future of media, but it's evolution is not happening fast enough. Maybe people will seek out more reliable media when things are so bad they search more for the truth.
As someone who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020 - I am very sad to see that Chuck Todd is leaving NBC. Talent will always shine through - thus I believe he will flourish. I hate to be so melodramatic, but independent and free thinking journalist are more important now than ever before.
I'm sorry to say that I don't see any possibility for strengthening local news in places where trust has been lost. Local news media are disappearing fast, and those remaining are largely owned by venture capital firms that are at least as profit-focused as national media ownership (if not by politically motivated corporations, such as Sinclair, that do not deserve and have no interest in earning deserved trust).
I also don't see any connection between the hope that local news can rebuild community and trust and the role of Substack blogs, which are anything but local, and which are especially subject to becoming political echo chambers.
I agree fully that strengthening conscientious local news and maximizing sane independent voices on Substack are good things. But if the project of the moment is to develop a long-term strategy for freeing the country of toxic disinformation, incompetence, and authoritarianism, I think we need to discover better leverage opportunities than these. Optimism is motivating but not helpful if it's not well grounded.
Are we certain that in this environment substack will continue to exist? If TikTok can be threatened and closed for national security, what will keep other platforms open if they are declared threats? don’t think that our government isn’t looking at how media is controlled in other dictatorships and learning how to do that here!
I did not want to utter these words of yours, but now that "the horse is out of the barn" — Unknown... I would be the first to say that I don't have a clue. That said, now is probably a good time to share our thoughts before they are extinguished! I'm going to quote from Jim Acosta's farewell message from CNN.
1) It is never a good time to bow-down to a tyrant. — Raul Castro
2) "Don't give-in to the lies; don't give-in to the fear; and hold-on to the truth and to hope." — Jim Acosta
Tik Tok is a Chinese Espionage tool...this substack isnt...I will say some sacrifice truth so they don't appear partisan...and that is what causes lost of trust
With all due respect to Chuck Todd, he is showing profound naiveté in his statement that “The media has a lot of work to do to win back the trust of viewers/listeners/readers” .
The reason why “the media” has lost trust of “viewers/listener/ readers” is the over thee decade attack from right wingers that had it’s start when Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich darkened our doorstep, assisted by the well funded megaphone of Fox “News” which brought their vile demagoguery into the mainstream.
Fox “News” is nothing more than a propaganda outlet for radical right wing ideology with the goal of imposing right wing authoritarianism straight out of the old Soviet Union playbook
This relentless (and almost all DEEPLY dishonest) smearing and demagogic effort to marginalize and demonize facts and truth (read: “the media”) that is outside the radical right wing has been largely successful to the detriment of this country’s democracy.
No, Mr. Todd, the fault of lack of “trust” is not because of anything the “media” did. They were easy marks to unprincipled lairs.
The media's own principles, standards and dedication to reporting as accurately as they can is no match for shrill, dishonest propagandists and a shrewd con-man in Donald Trump who’s shameless lying feeds the cult that was cultivated by years of Rush, Newt and Fox “News” which is now made even stronger and more lethal with the easy disinformation megaphone know as social media and podcasts that uses the free distribution pipeline of the internet to spread their toxic bullshit.
Dave, I have to respectfully disagree. Conservatives say the exact same thing about MSNBC and CNN. They say the radical left wing media is destroying democracy. As a result, trust in media is at an all time low, and I promise you 2 years from now it will be even lower. No one network/newspaper caused this, collectively they did. It wasn’t Fox and the WSJ anymore than it was CNN and the NYT. Until enough people recognize this, we are going to continue to unravel as a country.
Fox continually makes up stories and traffics in disinformation, even went to court to preserve their right to knowingly lie to their viewers. that's the difference
True, other media outlets do too. Bad reporting on Covid. Bad reporting on trans issues. Going all in on being anti-Trump. Even the eating the dogs story which yes was a dumb thing to say. But the press in their frenzy to make Trump look bad missed the story about immigration and the Biden administration being much more open to asylum seekers and interpreters other laws as liberally as possible to let people in. The press carried water for the Democrats and tersely said it’s legal. Like they were supreme court justices. They’re not, they are supposed to be informing peoples with the whole truth not being advocates for a single party.
Immigration was probably the biggest single issue in the election.
Bingo, Dean.
Great piece and an example of why, as a more conservative reader, I am paying to follow you. Your comment about national media will probably never regain trust is spot on. Once trust is lost it is incredibly hard to regain it. Second, I strongly agree with your/Chuck’s comments about community. Even though I don’t agree with every you write, I am part of the community you have created. Finally, people need to stop following only people that think like they do. Diversify of thought, IMO, is the most important one. I seriously have not watched one network news station (including Fox) for 10 years. I have not read one newspaper in about 8 years. They lost my trust and will never get it back. I gladly pay 7 subscriptions on Substack and am an active follower of about 150 people on X. I feel like I am more informed then the shrinking number of people still following MSM. Again…great piece…thank you.
To reference one of your recent posts, I agree with about 72% of it.
But, more seriously - he's not wrong. In your questions yesterday there was a post about building a left-wing ecosphere to compete against the right. It was a Dem talking head on CNN a couple of weeks back who pointed out that the MSM largely excluded conservative voices so they had to build their own model. I'm sure there was a point when the MSM was more balanced (not in my lifetime) and that's likely when trust is media was much higher - when either group lives in an echo chamber, the path to crazy town is an express highway.
What I (and I'm guessing many who subscribe) appreciate is that you give us your honest takes and aren't just searching for clicks. There are plenty of wild people on all side but the cacophony of views are what challenge us and get us to better evaluate our own.
Given that your Substack is a business, it's a challenge to balance revenue and objectivity (real & perceived). You noted yesterday about potential "bundles" down the line. Eventually, I can see sponsorships & paid partnerships. So, we wish you, Chuck and others continued growth and opportunities but be careful you don't become what you're leaving.
Keep up the great work. Always appreciate your insights - even when I don't agree.
This is pretty much in accord with my opinion, though much more balanced & well written than the cynical thoughts in my head.
The fact that these talented folks are all having epiphanies in the face of industry upheaval makes me wonder how their objectivity and integrity were previously compromised by generous paychecks.
No one should miss Chuck's last podcast with Marty Baron. It is a great discussion on media and where it is going.
One point that really hit home to me is Chuck's comment about Substack and similar outlets. The fact that at $60 - $80 a pop per year, there is no way any one individual can afford to subscribe to the journalists that they used to get from a few major sources. In order to be economically viable, you are going to need to consolidate into The Bulwark or similar groups to make your journalism affordable.
As to local news, there is an experiment going on here in Minnesota. The Star Tribune has set up a Foundation for local news and is working to fund it themselves and through the Foundation. It's only at the beginning, but it looks promising. The reason I gave the Foundation money is that our local newspapers went out of business and even though I live in the Twin Cities metro, I relied on the local newspaper to cover the local news (i.e., city council meetings, events, school district meetings, etc.). That is now gone and nothing replaced it. I have been pushing the Star Tribune to expand their Web site to cover local news all over the state rather than cherry picking a couple of stories, Create whole pages devoted to local regions and let all of the news be populated there. The paper can still cherry pick, but at least we would have somewhere to go for more of our local news.
Really thoughtful post, Jeff.
I worry though, about the economics of Substack. Each subscription is $5-10, but you can subscribe to large outfits for similar or a little more that give you dozens of stories every day.
I came here to make precisely the same comment. Ultimately it results in the same problem because human nature says that most people aren’t going to pay money to read things that they disagree with.
What happens to businesses whose models don’t work anymore? They change. Remember William Randolph Hearst? Ofc not! Major conservative MSMer against FDR. But they changed and today Hearst Media probably owns your local TV station!
Twitter was never Revenue positive, it was a terrible economic investment, but everyone touted it as ‘the town square.’ Reddit and Substack may disrupt and will have staying power just as Twitter/X does….but MSM will in some way remain.
Substack is going to have to figure out their revenue model and you will see ads at some point. A purely creator driven marketplace where a percentage is taken from each sub is unsustainable, as we can see from cable TV’s subscription drop.
I agree with Chucks point on local media but am not smart enough to envision the environment where robust local journalism prospers. Local newspapers are in the hand of Private Equity and by and large local TV is corporately owned. I am sure there is an answer but it is not readily apparent to me.
A particularly cogent article for this discussion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/01/nyregion/new-jersey-star-ledger-prints-final-edition.html?unlocked_article_code=1.tk4.9KAc.WAliV3IZe9_o&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
I'm not from NJ but still sad to see. There are no easy solutions to it. The internet is a wonderful thing but some of the collateral damage to things like this are a significant loss. Not sure how it's "fixed" or replaced but hopefully someone figures it out.
The link to this NYT article is not behind a paywall. It says, "unlocked_article" right in tbe link.
Thank you Gail.
You’re welcome.
two good guys here....we need more like Chuck and Chris.
That's precisely what I was going to say!
Chris, this is the time for independent voices who report the truth and the states. It’s important to distinguish individuals who report the world around them in real time and the media who get some kind of remuneration for doing that. I’m sorry to say that paid journalism is open to corruption. I know that is the way many writers make a living. But you just can’t trust them unless it’s transparent exactly where that funding is coming from.
So those who use Substack should perhaps prioritize the free writing available in spades here.
As for the states, the blue ones specifically, are leading the attack on the out of control federal government. Not the political parties. Not the Democrats in Congress. So thank the founders for that model.
That’s where our republic is going. It’s a straight fight between the states and the federal government for control of the United States. The states are likely to win in my opinion. We will see.
I’m in agreement. Here’s the rub: too many local affiliates are owned by the larger media conglomerates. Thus they get ‘copy’ that is exactly what the other stations are producing and then airing it in exactly the same order with cookie cutter reporters. (Although in Sacramento local location reporters are POC!) Companies like Sinclair, McClatchy, and Murdoch have done to local news what they did to newspapers, cable news, and social media. Hopefully, Substack with all its variety, can withstand the oligarchs and their control.
These comments about “local” news are evidence of an *extreme* ignorance of the current ownership of “local” stations. I keep on writing this and it seems to get missed, but having worked 45 tears selling high-technology software/hardware to the Media & Entertainment industry, it was my job, in order to close sales, to find out who was at the top of the “approvals” and get to them directly. I know who owns what (or at least, I DID, until I retired 14 months ago…).
Sinclair Broadcast Group owns 200+ TV stations, and in fact own multiple properties in each of the major media markets. Their rightwing billionaire owners make sure that corporate “copy” is distributed and read on air at every single one of their “local” stations. You can’t trust those “local” stations.
iHeart Media own 800+ radio stations, again, with multiples in every major media market, and they “report” what their rightwing billionaires want reported. Even though Americans are fairly close to evenly split between the left and right sides of the political spectrum (obviously it shifts slightly over time…), why is it that the airwaves are thick with rightwing talk radio but there’s virtually *nothing* that gives voice to the left side of politics on the air? It’s, once again, the predominance of rightwing media owners.
Wake up, people! This “left leaning MSM” meme couldn’t be MORE incorrect in 2025, but likely hasn’t been true for many decades, back when the FCC ended the Fairness Doctrine and ended the prohibition of corporations only owning a single station in each market.
Sorry, Chuck Todd, but “local” news isn’t going to save us. In fact, it’s the most intractable of problems in regards to “regaining trust”.
I can remember the days that I believed Chuck Todd was an honorable moderator on MTP. I stopped watching & listening to him when he gave Ron Johnson of Wisconsin a pass on a blatant lie (during Trump 1.0) which today, among all of the lies I don’t even remember which one it was. MTP & NBC have lost their compass. I wish him well but I hope he finds his spine & goes back to holding people accountable.
Totally agree. I used to enjoy the Sunday morning talk shows until they devolved into GQP propagandists and sane-washed the hell out of ConOLD.
Chuck had a lot to do with that. He was never even close to being as good as Tim Russert who actually pushed back against lies and non answers to questions.
I need news: local, national and international. But as a full time business owner, parent, spouse, exerciser and hopefully squeezing in some me time, I only have so much bandwidth (time wise, emotional, and $). So whether it’s newspapers, podcasts, Substack, TV — I only have so much capacity. This means I have to figure out the most trustworthy sources to receive and understand the news.
For local, as a person born and raised in the Puget Sound region, I subscribe to the Seattle Times and Tacoma News Tribune. Yes I have concerns about ownership, and am saddened with the decline in size of the newspapers, but there is no better source of local journalism so I subscribe both digitally and, yes, to the Sunday paper. I encourage everyone to do the same and tell all your friends you do it. Here’s a good piece from Pew on local news: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2024/05/07/americans-changing-relationship-with-local-news/
For national and International news, I sub to the NYT and Atlantic. These and other publications sometimes break my trust, but overall they earn it and I have to know what’s going on. There’s more I would like to subscribe to, but… I only have so much bandwidth.
Cable news for me took a trust hit when it morphed from reporting the hard news to opinion and entertainment. I still watch it sometimes especially when there is a major story. But not that often, frankly.
Right now I support with my time and my money two people in independent media and Chris is one of them. I have followed you Chris since The Fix days. I simply do not have the capacity time wise to support more although I would like to. Take podcasts, for instance. I think they are great! I just don’t have the time unless I have a few minutes while driving. While I consume most of your content, I can’t consume all of it because I just don’t have the bandwidth.
I support Chris for his unvarnished, unbiased, objective, professional, educated, experienced, timely and reliable reporting (journalism!) ON the news, and because he helps me understand what it means and where we’re going. I help my clients make decisions by fully informing them so they can make informed conclusions and decisions. This is what Chris does for me. No journalist is infallible, but I have found Chris’s reporting to be helpful and reliable for years. And hell he comes with personality, authenticity and humor which I can surely use.
I need the deeply sourced NYT stories on this administration’s shenanigans, and I need Chris to help me understand it all.
With Trump rapidly destroying the country and half the country not paying attention or not accessing reliable media we are so screwed. I don't what the answer is in the future of media, but it's evolution is not happening fast enough. Maybe people will seek out more reliable media when things are so bad they search more for the truth.
As someone who voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020 - I am very sad to see that Chuck Todd is leaving NBC. Talent will always shine through - thus I believe he will flourish. I hate to be so melodramatic, but independent and free thinking journalist are more important now than ever before.