Epstein Files | Patel: Trust us

[StrangePackage]

How is it dishonest? It’s not scripted or edited or soundbited, no? You get to hear the guy speak and judge for yourself with no middleman.

Because their guests are frequently lying or just deeply misinformated. And they have no editorial process to address those issues.

 

[farce©]

This clip of Von and Vance exemplifies the dynamic I was talking about. Von seems to genuinely care about the carnage in Gaza, but he doesn’t have a journalistic bone in his body. There’s no pressing Vance on the issue, and Von’s listeners are done a disservice by this. I can parse these things with the knowledge I have, most listeners of these pods cannot.

For that reason, we can’t allow the right to monopolize the podcast space. Dems need to embrace left independent media.

Democrats don’t appear on podcasts?

 

[Paine]

Democrats don’t appear on podcasts?

Can I assume you’ve read my other posts on this thread before I take the time to respond to this?

 

[McAdooSmackinYou]

lol at CNN being liberal media

 

[Paine]

lol at CNN being liberal media

A lot of people hear "liberal media" and assume it means "media that blindly supports Democrats 100% of the time." That’s not what I mean. CNN is liberal media, not because it pushes progressive policy, but because it represents a particular kind of institutional liberalism: pro-business, technocratic, and deferential to authority.

Yes, it sometimes criticizes Democrats, but it does so from a position within the establishment, not from outside it. That’s part of its brand: maintaining the illusion of objectivity while generally reinforcing the status quo. And yes, it features conservative voices, but that’s not a contradiction. The spectrum on CNN tends to run from centrist liberal to Never Trump Republican. What’s excluded are voices that seriously challenge corporate power, permanent war, or deep economic inequality from the left.

 

[heelinhell]

On an entirely different note, if you are coming to the Bosh today, you should come to the tailgate party and hang out with us and all the player's families.

I attended a few several years ago. I had season tickets and my name is on the Bosh wall.

You were/are a gracious host. I haven't been to a game since Covid but follow the Heels on IC, here, and GoHeels.com. I will be watching on tv with two buddies and havefor a trip to Omaha !

 

[Centerpiece]

A lot of people hear "liberal media" and assume it means "media that blindly supports Democrats 100% of the time." That’s not what I mean. CNN is liberal media, not because it pushes progressive policy, but because it represents a particular kind of institutional liberalism: pro-business, technocratic, and deferential to authority.

Yes, it sometimes criticizes Democrats, but it does so from a position within the establishment, not from outside it. That’s part of its brand: maintaining the illusion of objectivity while generally reinforcing the status quo. And yes, it features conservative voices, but that’s not a contradiction. The spectrum on CNN tends to run from centrist liberal to Never Trump Republican. What’s excluded are voices that seriously challenge corporate power, permanent war, or deep economic inequality from the left.

The United States is not the worst globally but it is 31st in education in 2024. Listening to Podcasts ain't helping. Read Reuters and AP if you want news. Watch cable TV and listen to podcasts if you want entertainment and be fed misinformation. Best thing? Travel. See the world. Live in another country for a while.

ETA: It ain't the Dems fault... but a ton of blame can be laid at the feet of Pubs and the Rush/O'Reilly/Joe Rogan Klan.

 

[heelinhell]

A lot of people hear "liberal media" and assume it means "media that blindly supports Democrats 100% of the time." That’s not what I mean. CNN is liberal media, not because it pushes progressive policy, but because it represents a particular kind of institutional liberalism: pro-business, technocratic, and deferential to authority.

Yes, it sometimes criticizes Democrats, but it does so from a position within the establishment, not from outside it. That’s part of its brand: maintaining the illusion of objectivity while generally reinforcing the status quo. And yes, it features conservative voices, but that’s not a contradiction. The spectrum on CNN tends to run from centrist liberal to Never Trump Republican. What’s excluded are voices that seriously challenge corporate power, permanent war, or deep economic inequality from the left.

I agree that CNN is a centrist network unwilling to promote neither a liberal nor conservative agenda.

Who are some serious leftists you would like to see on CNN ?

 

[Paine]

The United States is not the worst globally but it is 31st in education in 2024. Listening to Podcasts ain't helping. Read Reuters and AP if you want news. Watch cable TV and listen to podcasts if you want entertainment and be fed misinformation. Best thing? Travel. See the world. Live in another country for a while.

I’d encourage you to fully read my posts in this thread.

It’s a mistake to dismiss podcasts or alternative media outright, as if they're all entertainment or misinformation. That’s the same kind of blanket judgment people used to make about blogs in the early 2000s, and it ignored the fact that real investigative journalism and critical analysis were emerging outside legacy outlets.

As I’ve said, a lot of younger people turn to podcasts not because they hate facts, but because they feel the traditional news media hasn’t earned their trust.

Yes, Reuters and AP have value, especially for raw reporting. But they also reflect institutional priorities: what stories get covered, how they’re framed, and what gets left out.

And cable news? That’s been dominated by partisan theater and corporate interests for decades. The idea that this is somehow more serious or more factual than longform interviews, independent reporting, or even user-driven analysis on platforms like Substack or YouTube just doesn't hold up anymore.

And on travel: I agree, seeing the world can be eye-opening. But I’d argue that genuinely engaging with the concerns of working people in your own country, across class and political divides, is just as important. Plenty of people have passports and still don’t understand why trust in elite institutions has cratered.

 

[Paine]

I agree that CNN is a centrist network unwilling to promote neither a liberal nor conservative agenda.

Who are some serious leftists you would like to see on CNN ?

I don’t necessarily need to see leftists on CNN. I don’t watch CNN unless I’m in a waiting room, and honestly, I don’t know anyone my age who regularly tunes into it. Cable news networks like CNN have been losing viewers for years, especially among younger audiences.

Sure, there might be some limited value in reaching CNN’s audience with a left message, but leftist media figures already have their own shows and platforms. That’s where the real energy and future of political discourse are happening.

If Democrats want to build trust and grow their coalition, they need to meet people where they actually are now, not where they were 20 years ago. That means engaging honestly with alternative and independent media instead of writing it off.

 

[heelinhell]

I’d encourage you to fully read my posts in this thread.

It’s a mistake to dismiss podcasts or alternative media outright, as if they're all entertainment or misinformation. That’s the same kind of blanket judgment people used to make about blogs in the early 2000s, and it ignored the fact that real investigative journalism and critical analysis were emerging outside legacy outlets.

As I’ve said, a lot of younger people turn to podcasts not because they hate facts, but because they feel the traditional news media hasn’t earned their trust.

Yes, Reuters and AP have value, especially for raw reporting. But they also reflect institutional priorities: what stories get covered, how they’re framed, and what gets left out.

And cable news? That’s been dominated by partisan theater and corporate interests for decades. The idea that this is somehow more serious or more factual than longform interviews, independent reporting, or even user-driven analysis on platforms like Substack or YouTube just doesn't hold up anymore.

And on travel: I agree, seeing the world can be eye-opening. But I’d argue that genuinely engaging with the concerns of working people in your own country, across class and political divides, is just as important. Plenty of people have passports and still don’t understand why trust in elite institutions has cratered.

Dem economic policies continue striving to improve the lives of working class and middle class families, but until the Dems abandon their laudable positions on cultural issues, attracting "working people " is going to be a tough row to hoe...

 

[Paine]

Dem economic policies continue striving to improve the lives of working class and middle class families, but until the Dems abandon their laudable positions on cultural issues, attracting "working people " is going to be a tough row to hoe...

I think your framing misses something important. It’s not the positions on cultural issues that turn people off, it’s the perception that Democrats prioritize symbolic fights over material gains. Most working people aren’t hostile to cultural inclusion, but they do get frustrated when it feels like their economic struggles are an afterthought.

The real disconnect isn’t really values, it’s emphasis. If Democrats led with bold, universal economic policies that clearly improved people’s lives, that would cut through a lot of the culture war noise.

People respect a party that fights for them in ways they can feel. Right now, many don’t feel that from either party.

 

[Centerpiece]

I’d encourage you to fully read my posts in this thread.

It’s a mistake to dismiss podcasts or alternative media outright, as if they're all entertainment or misinformation. That’s the same kind of blanket judgment people used to make about blogs in the early 2000s, and it ignored the fact that real investigative journalism and critical analysis were emerging outside legacy outlets.

As I’ve said, a lot of younger people turn to podcasts not because they hate facts, but because they feel the traditional news media hasn’t earned their trust.

Yes, Reuters and AP have value, especially for raw reporting. But they also reflect institutional priorities: what stories get covered, how they’re framed, and what gets left out.

And cable news? That’s been dominated by partisan theater and corporate interests for decades. The idea that this is somehow more serious or more factual than longform interviews, independent reporting, or even user-driven analysis on platforms like Substack or YouTube just doesn't hold up anymore.

And on travel: I agree, seeing the world can be eye-opening. But I’d argue that genuinely engaging with the concerns of working people in your own country, across class and political divides, is just as important. Plenty of people have passports and still don’t understand why trust in elite institutions has cratered.

O, I've read your missives on this thread. And I can tell we are of a mind politically. And I'll agree Dems could do a better job of reaching out and fighting fire with fire in terms of blasting a firehouse of podcasts and cranking up "left-wing" radio broadcasts to battle the Pubs in that arena.

I subscribe to and read a few Substacks. Dr. HCR and Dean Blundell to name a couple...

I never said, nor meant to imply that cable news is more serious or factual than anything. Quite the opposite actually. But the key here is the "more serious/factual". Therein lies the rub. I won't blindly sit back and think Rogan or Von are "more serious and factual" than any other Rush-type blow hard with a microphone and a platform.

Travel is the best education. Period. And once one has had a chance to view life from a different perspective in that regard (the world and humanity from a different perspective) it can help one discern the concerns of people... in this country or anywhere else. As far as having a passport, I'd wager 90% of right-wing podcast listeners don't own one. Nor do they probably want to get one or travel outside of their basement.

Institutions didn't get to be "elite" for no reason.

Get your news from reliable sources like Reuters and AP; Travel (U.S. and the world) and live abroad as much as you can reasonably do so. And then draw your own petty conclusions. Having your ear buds in all day listening to podcasts and right-wing radio broadcasts does NOTHING to cure America's ills of being #31.

 

[Paine]

O, I've read your missives on this thread. And I can tell we are of a mind politically. And I'll agree Dems could do a better job of reaching out and fighting fire with fire in terms of blasting a firehouse of podcasts and cranking up "left-wing" radio broadcasts to battle the Pubs in that arena.

I subscribe to and read a few Substacks. Dr. HCR and Dean Blundell to name a couple...

I never said, nor meant to imply that cable news is more serious or factual than anything. Quite the opposite actually. But the key here is the "more serious/factual". Therein lies the rub. I won't blindly sit back and think Rogan or Von are "more serious and factual" than any other Rush-type blow hard with a microphone and a platform.

Travel is the best education. Period. And once one has had a chance to view life from a different perspective in that regard (the world and humanity from a different perspective) it can help one discern the concerns of people... in this country or anywhere else. As far as having a passport, I'd wager 90% of right-wing podcast listeners don't own one. Nor do they probably want to get one or travel outside of their basement.

Institutions didn't get to be "elite" for no reason.

Get your news from reliable sources like Reuters and AP; Travel (U.S. and the world) and live abroad as much as you can reasonably do so. And then draw your own petty conclusions. Having your ear buds in all day listening to podcasts and right-wing radio broadcasts does NOTHING to cure America's ills of being #31.

I’m glad we mostly agree politically, and I see the value in travel. I travel a lot because I have the resources to.

But this “pick yourself up by your bootstraps” idea of education and media literacy overlooks real barriers many face. Not everyone has the means to travel. Institutions need to earn trust, especially from those they’ve failed. Understanding why people turn to certain media is key. These problems need systemic solutions, not just individual effort.

 

[Centerpiece]

I’m glad we mostly agree politically, and I see the value in travel. I travel a lot because I have the resources to.

But this “pick yourself up by your bootstraps” idea of education and media literacy overlooks real barriers many face. Not everyone has the means to travel. Institutions need to earn trust, especially from those they’ve failed. Understanding why people turn to certain media is key. These problems need systemic solutions, not just individual effort.

Barriers indeed... but I still contend those who can't get out from underneath their rock don't need to blindly listen to and believe the non-serious and non-factual BS.

So what's the systemic solution? The knuckle dragging, mouth breathing humans amongst us are still going to fall victim to what the Hitlers and their disinformation machines can vomit. It's easy to see why people turn to certain media. But I refuse to believe anything on any podcast has more gravity than experiencing real life in real time. I'll take Walter Cronkite in the 1960's any day - whether or not he was part of the "elite institutions" which some say Americans have grown to "mistrust".

Edited...

 

[Paine]

Barriers indeed... but I still contend those who can't get out from underneath their rock don't need to blindly listen to and believe the non-serious and non-factual BS.

So what's the systemic solution? The knuckle dragging, mouth breathing humans amongst us are still going to fall victim to what the Hitlers and their disinformation machines can vomit. It's easy to see why people turn to certain media. But I refuse to believe anything on any podcast has more gravity than experiencing real life in real time. I'll take Walter Cronkite in the 1960's any day - whether or not he was part of the "elite institutions" which Americans have grown to mistrust.

I agree that critical thinking is crucial, and blindly trusting anything, be it podcasts or legacy media, is a problem. But I think dismissing people as “knuckle dragging” is ultimately unhelpful to our political project.

Real systemic solutions means investing in education, economic opportunity, and rebuilding institutions so people aren’t pushed toward disinformation in the first place. Obviously, none of this easy, especially as Republicans are actively tearing it all down further.

Walter Cronkite was trusted because the system worked better for many when he was prominent. We need to focus on fixing that, not just longing for a bygone era.

 

[finesse]

I agree that critical thinking is crucial, and blindly trusting anything, be it podcasts or legacy media, is a problem. But I think dismissing people as “knuckle dragging” is ultimately unhelpful to our political project.

Real systemic solutions means investing in education, economic opportunity, and rebuilding institutions so people aren’t pushed toward disinformation in the first place. Obviously, none of this easy, especially as Republicans are actively tearing it all down further.

Walter Cronkite was trusted because the system worked better for many when he was prominent. We need to focus on fixing that, not just longing for a bygone era.

Well, except for blacks and women and poor people and gays and liberals and such.

 

[Paine]

Well, except for blacks and women and poor people and gays and liberals and such.

Not sure I follow.

 

[heelinhell]

I think your framing misses something important. It’s not the positions on cultural issues that turn people off, it’s the perception that Democrats prioritize symbolic fights over material gains. Most working people aren’t hostile to cultural inclusion, but they do get frustrated when it feels like their economic struggles are an afterthought.

The real disconnect isn’t really values, it’s emphasis. If Democrats led with bold, universal economic policies that clearly improved people’s lives, that would cut through a lot of the culture war noise.

People respect a party that fights for them in ways they can feel. Right now, many don’t feel that from either party.

I respectfully disagree that working people are not hostile when it comes to cultural issues...

God ?
Guns ?
Gays ?
Immigration ?

And I submit that Dems have promoted and passed bold economic policies that clearly have improved people's lives. It's those policies that have not cut through because the working people are concerned about brown hordes invading our country, women getting elective abortions in the 9th month, Dems threatening to take away our guns...

 

[Paine]

I respectfully disagree that working people are not hostile when it comes to cultural issues...

God ?
Guns ?
Gays ?
Immigration ?

And I submit that Dems have promoted and passed bold economic policies that clearly have improved people's lives. It's those policies that have not cut through because the working people are concerned about brown hordes invading our country, women getting elective abortions in the 9th month, Dems threatening to take away our guns...

Now we’re getting into the conversations we had extensively following the 2024 election. I don’t want to rehash it further than this, especially on an unrelated thread.

I don’t deny that cultural issues have been weaponized to rile up working people, but we have to ask why that strategy works.

When people feel economically abandoned or insecure, they become more susceptible to scapegoating. It’s not that working people are naturally hostile, it’s that they've been manipulated by decades of right-wing messaging filling the void left by a Democratic Party that hasn’t consistently fought for them in visible, legible ways.

Yes, Dems have passed some good policies, but many working people haven’t felt the benefits or don’t connect those benefits to the party. That’s a messaging and organizing failure, not just a voter ignorance problem. If we want economic gains to land politically, we have to talk less like MSNBC panelists and more like people meeting folks where they are, without ceding ground on values or dignity.

There’s obviously room for complexity within this, but that’s my general position. I know that there are large segments of the working class who are too far gone at this point. There is also a segment of people who will always vote for Republicans. But there is a large number of working people who sit out elections or vote based mainly on economic policy, not cultural grievance.