First - totally agree. I try to get balanced news, probably don't do a good enough job, but I am open to things. This is a good idea.
Second - I know you are giving this advice to everyone, regardless of where they are on the political/ideological spectrum.
This is my complaint (confusion?) about this discussion - the issue isn't where we get news from, it is the fact that people have decided that reality doesn't exist. Why is it my responsibility to understand them when they say the economy is bad. It isn't. Why is it my responsibility to learn things that aren't real. Why isn't it their responsibility to actually - and I can't believe that this is something I need to say - believe reality. Not the reality in their head, the reality on the ground.
Every time something wrong is said, we say "that's not true" and someone says I'm living in a bubble. How many times has Chris said the line about people coming from prisons and mental institutions is false (hundreds?) and they still believe it and I'm supposed to follow their news forums?
Somebody needs to explain this to me because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! (can't add gifs here or I would add that one)
Each of us has to find what works for us. We have to see the real, fake etc and try to manage it for us. I get the craziness. I've found it helpful to look for the things that cause least angst. I hope this is helpful. Good luck!
I appreciate your words -but it really doesn't help. Why is it that I'm supposed to try and understand them (which I do), but they don't have to try and understand me - or the truth for that matter.
Because trying to understand both them and the truth is the right thing to do, and you can't do anything about whether or not *they* do the right thing, only whether or not you do. Of course we're real human beings with real squishy human feelings, and so that Buddha-esque level of detachment is hard to attain. But I still think it's worth striving for.
Logically I understand, agree with, and appreciate your sentiment. Where it gets difficult is that I still have to suffer in the world they created - which makes me want to do the right thing, but still lash out at them.
And yes, they have clearly made it an us vs them situation.
Oh, yeah. I'm right there with you. Everything you've expressed here is pretty much exactly the way I feel. My last comment? That's the advice I give myself every single freaking day. Often multiple times a day. And I could go on and on about how I deal with it all, but honestly, whether or not any of that would be helpful to you ... So I guess the best I can say is ... yeah, I get it.
Hmmm....I think a piece that you are not addressing is the frustration from those of us who do consume a considerable amount of legitimate news and analysis - from any source. We are frustrated because our consuming more news and being more aware is not the issue in our minds. If you truly look at facts, then supporting Trump is ridiculous. And if it is just about vibes, or an attitude, or whatever, then what is there to be gained by us consuming more news of any kind? There is such a huge divide in assessing what matters that I don't honestly think where we are getting our news makes much difference. I know bias when I see it. I know it from both sides. I add it to my calculus. But it doesn't change facts. And apparently half the country doesn't really care about those facts anyway.
I REALLY struggle with a party and media that are okay with pardoning J6 “patriots”. It is shocking to me. I have said since that day that if those were black bodies crawling all over the Capitol the result and reaction would have been wildly different
Like the email you received, I am avoiding the national news for the most part. Using the food analogy, I'm not not eating anymore, I'm not eating cyanide anymore. Hearing about the clownish behavior, and the comments from the litany of apologists and sycophants makes my head explode (I'm getting a headache just typing this). I'm avoiding the national news for my own mental health, lest I stroke out.
The issue I have with this is that, to stick with the metaphor, most people are not eating. They're just looking at the menu. Unless a person plans on action derived from their media diet, what's the point? Most people are going to vote, and that's the extent of their political action. What benefit do most people get from consuming news that does nothing more than stress them out and make them fearful with no real ability to affect change? Why freak out about things one can't control? It seems like a lose-lose.
I think you are right, and how do we get them to engage and think deeper? Some of their parents aren't as they repeat what they hear on Fox that intellectually doesn't make sense. Maybe they will grow up and see the damage? Maybe the elderly will see the damage when they go to get their prescriptions filled at the drug store or online? We have to have conversations with them.
Regardless of where one gets their "news", with a psychotic, dangerous demagogue as president it is important for all Americans to be somewhat engaged and to be prepared to resist/respond when necessary. I get the urge to disengage, but that is exactly what Trump and the MAGA horde are hoping will happen. We must stay vigilant, and when needed, resistance must not be futile.
I think you're recommended media diet is sound. I can't stand either coconut nor eggplant. The right media is my coconut/eggplant. I get plenty of left via CNN (primarily). I hear you, and accept that I may need to hold my nose and take my coconut/eggplant now and then. But, it'll be hard. In the mean time, while it's not totally balanced, I will focus on at least consuming mostly centrist coverage. This is a large part of why I really like being one of your paid subscribers. I have trust in your transparency, and even handed coverage.
MSNBC was my hamburger. A double one with cheese, and mayo, and a pile of fries as well. Hours of chowing down. I have given that up in its entirety, my blood pressure and heart rate can’t take it any more. I put myself on a two-week “cleanse” of no news programs at all, just the New York times, a few selected independent journalists, and blessed relief from the opinionated pounding of “personalities” filling up an hour with speculation and fearmongering. After the cleanse, I discovered that major “news” channels are not very nutritious. However….the politics of the moment, the hamfisted and tone deaf swaggering of the incoming administration, require attention. I am finding that independent journalists can fulfill my need for information without giving me heartburn. I am a liberal, but I am finding inspiration in genuinely conservative sources like The Bulwark. I read Chris, even though I don’t always agree with him he gets me thinking. It is important to tease out enough real information about what is happening to make coherent communication with my elected officials about how I expect them to respond to the lawless shenanigans of a bitter old man with a personality disorder, and to his minions. Burying our heads in the sand is comforting, but it is not an option and won’t lead to solutions. The “Mediterranean diet” of information consumption will leave us all healthier, happier, and better able to control our future.
Here is the issue: I am a vegetarian and most sources are giving me red meat and saying it’s is veggie burger. I am not going to consume media that gets the facts wrong. I am not going to consume “centrist media voices” who choose to be centrist in their opinions by merely also saying the opposite opinion regardless of it reflects the facts.
And did I mention the red meat passed off as veggie burgers suddenly costs a LOT of money that many people don’t have. In the last six months I have subscribed to $275 of independent journalism, far more than my former $65 combined annual gift subscriptions to the Post and NYT. I get that journalists need to make a living. But at some point, we have to confront who can afford a well balanced diet.
First of all, why eat hamburger when you can have steak? I just felt like saying that.
Next: I don't agree with those who want to turn off news for the next 4 years. Just like I think it is silly to move to Canada or Costa Rica because of that felon in the White House.
Next: I think it is equally as silly to be absorbed in the news. It is fine to take a break from the news to do whatever: travel, meditate, read something not news-related, etc. Trump should not live inside our heads 24/7 for the next 1,460 days.
Finally: I have found my own delicacies on the menu of current affairs. Besides Chris, I am sub-stacked with Scott Dworkin and Robert Reich. I do still subscribe to WaPo and NYT, also the Atlantic and The Daily Beast. In WaPo I especially love Eugene Robinson, Philip Bump, Amber Phillips, and Alexandra Petri. I enjoy Allan Lichtman on YouTube (oh yes I do!). And I belong to Facebook and Bluesky. No X nor TikTok.
Anyway, I hope you remember to eat (and drink) responsibly. Don't let Trump screw up your life. Keep in mind we have like 18 months or so until voting season starts up again.
Thank you Chris, my gut reaction is to put my head in the sand, but I know that is not a good or healthy response. I try listening to Joe Rogan but his comedy, commentary, misogamy is too hard. I would recommend Heather Cox Richardson, she is an historian who looks at the political events and puts them in a context that I appreciate. https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/
I also say to pay attention to your state and local news. I live in Trump country, and I see laws discussed/passed that Trump would like and the people working to either prevent or mitigate the damage.
"What this amounts to — to extend the food metaphor — is making a decision to simply stop eating. I don’t like the foods that are popular right now and so I am going to just stop eating entirely — and just hope things work out!"
Actually, I think a better metaphor is: You've been diagnosed with anaplastic thyroid cancer, you have six months to live, and there's absolutely nothing the doctors can do, but they still insist on dragging you in to be stabbed and poked and scanned, and you say "Eff you all! I'm going to spend the hundred and eighty days I have left sitting on my ass on the couch watching Netflix and eating hamburgers and Ben & Jerry's!"
For a big chunk of Americans, 2024 was a complete and utter failure of ... everything. To them, the United States electing Donald Trump--again!--basically means the US has fallen to the level of Russia under Putin, North Korea under Kim, Spain under Franco, Iraq under Saddam, etc. Not *is falling.* *Has fallen.* It's done. It's over. And they tried to stop it. They were engaged, they tried to stay informed, they got out and voted, they did all the things they were supposed to do. And it didn't work. It's a feeling of utter helplessness and hopelessness. So why stay engaged and informed at this point? It means nothing. It changes nothing. It's just self-torture.
Personally, I sympathize with those feelings. A lot. But I still think staying engaged is worthwhile, as painful, frustrating, horrifying, and infuriating as it can be.
What you should be looking to do is consume media that is based in facts. The left is not the problem here. Left-leaning mainstream media is not gaslighting the general population. They may be a little alarmist, but they remain fact-based.
Right-leaning media, which leans a lot farther right than MSNBC does left, perpetuates a false worldview. In this view, immigrants are overrunning the country and are largely dangerous; the economy is terrible and it is all Biden's fault; Democrats have weaponized the justice system to create false charges against Trump administration figures; January 6th was a walk in the park and any violence was fueled by the FBI and antifa; and anything Trump says can be justified if you squint really hard, tilt your head, and -- hey look over there that this thing that Democrats supposedly did that was outrageous.
Your diagnosis of the problem is another example of bothsideserism. The reason Democrats and non-Trump voters think the people who voted for him are irredeemable morons is that they don't operate in a fact-based reality, are hypocrites, and can rationalize anything that justifies their support of Trump. That is not a problem that can be fixed by liberals reading Fox News, Breitbart, Sean Spicer, the War Room, or the musings of Matt Gaetz on OANN. It will only increase the contempt.
No, I think the solution is that the media needs to clean up its own house. Reporters from gaslighting outlets should be shunned. I know the media doesn't like to report on itself, but the solution here is vigorous and rigorous coverage by mainstream outlets of their peers. You, and MSNBC, and NBC, and CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, and all legitimate outlets should be tearing down a media ecosystem that deals in falsehoods.
When Sean Hannity, Steve Bannon, Jessie Waters, Steve Doocy or his kid, Greg Gutfield, or the OANN idiots do "reporting" or commentary that pushes a false narrative, traditional media should descend on them like a flock of vultures. Peer pressure works. When Members of Congress -- Republican or Democrat -- push a false narrative or act blatantly hypocritically, the media should again descend like carrion birds and actually make it a scandal, rather than a hallway moment where they dodge that nobody on Fox will ever see.
The media needs to fix its own problem, because the solution is not the center and left consuming more right-wing content. The answer is making sure that the right wing content is at a minimum factually accurate and not disinformation and propaganda.
First - totally agree. I try to get balanced news, probably don't do a good enough job, but I am open to things. This is a good idea.
Second - I know you are giving this advice to everyone, regardless of where they are on the political/ideological spectrum.
This is my complaint (confusion?) about this discussion - the issue isn't where we get news from, it is the fact that people have decided that reality doesn't exist. Why is it my responsibility to understand them when they say the economy is bad. It isn't. Why is it my responsibility to learn things that aren't real. Why isn't it their responsibility to actually - and I can't believe that this is something I need to say - believe reality. Not the reality in their head, the reality on the ground.
Every time something wrong is said, we say "that's not true" and someone says I'm living in a bubble. How many times has Chris said the line about people coming from prisons and mental institutions is false (hundreds?) and they still believe it and I'm supposed to follow their news forums?
Somebody needs to explain this to me because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! (can't add gifs here or I would add that one)
Each of us has to find what works for us. We have to see the real, fake etc and try to manage it for us. I get the craziness. I've found it helpful to look for the things that cause least angst. I hope this is helpful. Good luck!
I appreciate your words -but it really doesn't help. Why is it that I'm supposed to try and understand them (which I do), but they don't have to try and understand me - or the truth for that matter.
Because trying to understand both them and the truth is the right thing to do, and you can't do anything about whether or not *they* do the right thing, only whether or not you do. Of course we're real human beings with real squishy human feelings, and so that Buddha-esque level of detachment is hard to attain. But I still think it's worth striving for.
Logically I understand, agree with, and appreciate your sentiment. Where it gets difficult is that I still have to suffer in the world they created - which makes me want to do the right thing, but still lash out at them.
And yes, they have clearly made it an us vs them situation.
Oh, yeah. I'm right there with you. Everything you've expressed here is pretty much exactly the way I feel. My last comment? That's the advice I give myself every single freaking day. Often multiple times a day. And I could go on and on about how I deal with it all, but honestly, whether or not any of that would be helpful to you ... So I guess the best I can say is ... yeah, I get it.
Hmmm....I think a piece that you are not addressing is the frustration from those of us who do consume a considerable amount of legitimate news and analysis - from any source. We are frustrated because our consuming more news and being more aware is not the issue in our minds. If you truly look at facts, then supporting Trump is ridiculous. And if it is just about vibes, or an attitude, or whatever, then what is there to be gained by us consuming more news of any kind? There is such a huge divide in assessing what matters that I don't honestly think where we are getting our news makes much difference. I know bias when I see it. I know it from both sides. I add it to my calculus. But it doesn't change facts. And apparently half the country doesn't really care about those facts anyway.
I REALLY struggle with a party and media that are okay with pardoning J6 “patriots”. It is shocking to me. I have said since that day that if those were black bodies crawling all over the Capitol the result and reaction would have been wildly different
Good point!!!!
Like the email you received, I am avoiding the national news for the most part. Using the food analogy, I'm not not eating anymore, I'm not eating cyanide anymore. Hearing about the clownish behavior, and the comments from the litany of apologists and sycophants makes my head explode (I'm getting a headache just typing this). I'm avoiding the national news for my own mental health, lest I stroke out.
The issue I have with this is that, to stick with the metaphor, most people are not eating. They're just looking at the menu. Unless a person plans on action derived from their media diet, what's the point? Most people are going to vote, and that's the extent of their political action. What benefit do most people get from consuming news that does nothing more than stress them out and make them fearful with no real ability to affect change? Why freak out about things one can't control? It seems like a lose-lose.
Thank you. My thoughts exactly!
I was typing while you were posting, but I totally agree. You just said it far more succinctly!
I think you are right, and how do we get them to engage and think deeper? Some of their parents aren't as they repeat what they hear on Fox that intellectually doesn't make sense. Maybe they will grow up and see the damage? Maybe the elderly will see the damage when they go to get their prescriptions filled at the drug store or online? We have to have conversations with them.
Regardless of where one gets their "news", with a psychotic, dangerous demagogue as president it is important for all Americans to be somewhat engaged and to be prepared to resist/respond when necessary. I get the urge to disengage, but that is exactly what Trump and the MAGA horde are hoping will happen. We must stay vigilant, and when needed, resistance must not be futile.
I think you're recommended media diet is sound. I can't stand either coconut nor eggplant. The right media is my coconut/eggplant. I get plenty of left via CNN (primarily). I hear you, and accept that I may need to hold my nose and take my coconut/eggplant now and then. But, it'll be hard. In the mean time, while it's not totally balanced, I will focus on at least consuming mostly centrist coverage. This is a large part of why I really like being one of your paid subscribers. I have trust in your transparency, and even handed coverage.
MSNBC was my hamburger. A double one with cheese, and mayo, and a pile of fries as well. Hours of chowing down. I have given that up in its entirety, my blood pressure and heart rate can’t take it any more. I put myself on a two-week “cleanse” of no news programs at all, just the New York times, a few selected independent journalists, and blessed relief from the opinionated pounding of “personalities” filling up an hour with speculation and fearmongering. After the cleanse, I discovered that major “news” channels are not very nutritious. However….the politics of the moment, the hamfisted and tone deaf swaggering of the incoming administration, require attention. I am finding that independent journalists can fulfill my need for information without giving me heartburn. I am a liberal, but I am finding inspiration in genuinely conservative sources like The Bulwark. I read Chris, even though I don’t always agree with him he gets me thinking. It is important to tease out enough real information about what is happening to make coherent communication with my elected officials about how I expect them to respond to the lawless shenanigans of a bitter old man with a personality disorder, and to his minions. Burying our heads in the sand is comforting, but it is not an option and won’t lead to solutions. The “Mediterranean diet” of information consumption will leave us all healthier, happier, and better able to control our future.
Agree. I had typed out a long response and hit the wrong key and it went “poof”, but the gist of it was what you are saying.
Here is the issue: I am a vegetarian and most sources are giving me red meat and saying it’s is veggie burger. I am not going to consume media that gets the facts wrong. I am not going to consume “centrist media voices” who choose to be centrist in their opinions by merely also saying the opposite opinion regardless of it reflects the facts.
And did I mention the red meat passed off as veggie burgers suddenly costs a LOT of money that many people don’t have. In the last six months I have subscribed to $275 of independent journalism, far more than my former $65 combined annual gift subscriptions to the Post and NYT. I get that journalists need to make a living. But at some point, we have to confront who can afford a well balanced diet.
I suggest https://ground.news/
First of all, why eat hamburger when you can have steak? I just felt like saying that.
Next: I don't agree with those who want to turn off news for the next 4 years. Just like I think it is silly to move to Canada or Costa Rica because of that felon in the White House.
Next: I think it is equally as silly to be absorbed in the news. It is fine to take a break from the news to do whatever: travel, meditate, read something not news-related, etc. Trump should not live inside our heads 24/7 for the next 1,460 days.
Finally: I have found my own delicacies on the menu of current affairs. Besides Chris, I am sub-stacked with Scott Dworkin and Robert Reich. I do still subscribe to WaPo and NYT, also the Atlantic and The Daily Beast. In WaPo I especially love Eugene Robinson, Philip Bump, Amber Phillips, and Alexandra Petri. I enjoy Allan Lichtman on YouTube (oh yes I do!). And I belong to Facebook and Bluesky. No X nor TikTok.
Anyway, I hope you remember to eat (and drink) responsibly. Don't let Trump screw up your life. Keep in mind we have like 18 months or so until voting season starts up again.
Multiple sources are good, but following a healthy diet does not mean eating poison.
Thank you Chris, my gut reaction is to put my head in the sand, but I know that is not a good or healthy response. I try listening to Joe Rogan but his comedy, commentary, misogamy is too hard. I would recommend Heather Cox Richardson, she is an historian who looks at the political events and puts them in a context that I appreciate. https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/
I also say to pay attention to your state and local news. I live in Trump country, and I see laws discussed/passed that Trump would like and the people working to either prevent or mitigate the damage.
"What this amounts to — to extend the food metaphor — is making a decision to simply stop eating. I don’t like the foods that are popular right now and so I am going to just stop eating entirely — and just hope things work out!"
Actually, I think a better metaphor is: You've been diagnosed with anaplastic thyroid cancer, you have six months to live, and there's absolutely nothing the doctors can do, but they still insist on dragging you in to be stabbed and poked and scanned, and you say "Eff you all! I'm going to spend the hundred and eighty days I have left sitting on my ass on the couch watching Netflix and eating hamburgers and Ben & Jerry's!"
For a big chunk of Americans, 2024 was a complete and utter failure of ... everything. To them, the United States electing Donald Trump--again!--basically means the US has fallen to the level of Russia under Putin, North Korea under Kim, Spain under Franco, Iraq under Saddam, etc. Not *is falling.* *Has fallen.* It's done. It's over. And they tried to stop it. They were engaged, they tried to stay informed, they got out and voted, they did all the things they were supposed to do. And it didn't work. It's a feeling of utter helplessness and hopelessness. So why stay engaged and informed at this point? It means nothing. It changes nothing. It's just self-torture.
Personally, I sympathize with those feelings. A lot. But I still think staying engaged is worthwhile, as painful, frustrating, horrifying, and infuriating as it can be.
Sorry, but this is another not great take.
What you should be looking to do is consume media that is based in facts. The left is not the problem here. Left-leaning mainstream media is not gaslighting the general population. They may be a little alarmist, but they remain fact-based.
Right-leaning media, which leans a lot farther right than MSNBC does left, perpetuates a false worldview. In this view, immigrants are overrunning the country and are largely dangerous; the economy is terrible and it is all Biden's fault; Democrats have weaponized the justice system to create false charges against Trump administration figures; January 6th was a walk in the park and any violence was fueled by the FBI and antifa; and anything Trump says can be justified if you squint really hard, tilt your head, and -- hey look over there that this thing that Democrats supposedly did that was outrageous.
Your diagnosis of the problem is another example of bothsideserism. The reason Democrats and non-Trump voters think the people who voted for him are irredeemable morons is that they don't operate in a fact-based reality, are hypocrites, and can rationalize anything that justifies their support of Trump. That is not a problem that can be fixed by liberals reading Fox News, Breitbart, Sean Spicer, the War Room, or the musings of Matt Gaetz on OANN. It will only increase the contempt.
No, I think the solution is that the media needs to clean up its own house. Reporters from gaslighting outlets should be shunned. I know the media doesn't like to report on itself, but the solution here is vigorous and rigorous coverage by mainstream outlets of their peers. You, and MSNBC, and NBC, and CNN, Washington Post, NY Times, and all legitimate outlets should be tearing down a media ecosystem that deals in falsehoods.
When Sean Hannity, Steve Bannon, Jessie Waters, Steve Doocy or his kid, Greg Gutfield, or the OANN idiots do "reporting" or commentary that pushes a false narrative, traditional media should descend on them like a flock of vultures. Peer pressure works. When Members of Congress -- Republican or Democrat -- push a false narrative or act blatantly hypocritically, the media should again descend like carrion birds and actually make it a scandal, rather than a hallway moment where they dodge that nobody on Fox will ever see.
The media needs to fix its own problem, because the solution is not the center and left consuming more right-wing content. The answer is making sure that the right wing content is at a minimum factually accurate and not disinformation and propaganda.
At the top of my list is Mad Magazine