@Persephone The Dread
I find the left / right polarization in the West to be particularly annoying, honestly. I find it pretty weird that so many people with I guess reasonable intelligence spend so much of their mental effort trying to prove the other side (or tribe as you call it) wrong. Even if it is something that shouldnít even be a left / right issue, like coronavirus, or relationships with China & Russia, or even North Korea or intervention in the ME, etc.
It almost feels like one side picks a position, and the other side just tries so hard to prove why the complete opposite position is the right one. And itís such an obvious trend, I donít see why people even do that honestly.
And yeah, maybe for some things the mainstream media is all on one page, but I guess thatís a consequence of capitalism?
The problem is that I donít even think social media, the way it exists now, is a better alternative. For one, itís also controlled by giant companies that determine the guidelines, the algorithms, and they in the end only care about money, so I think the algorithms are more likely to cause chaos / spread of disinformation than be a useful alternative to MSM. Also, people are tribalistic, emotional, and arenít really invested in knowing the whole picture about anything, generally speaking. I donít think this is something that can change.
Also, non MSM, like youtube channels, or whatever, they also have to sensationalize their content, and have to stick to the in-group thing or they lose audience, patrons, ads, etc. Itís just a smaller version of the same thing I guess.
Also, I feel like youtubers / independent media whatever, I think they can easily get unhinged, because you can get a few tens of thousands believing in any wild BS or conspiracy theory.
I definitely think a lot of people in the West trust non Western new sources more for the same reason you probably don't trust non Western sources. A significant chunk of Western people don't trust Western media. There are also some less mainstream sources people use.
I don't think it's equivalent though. In a democracy (doesn't have to be Western, but mostly is), you can get more than one voice. In the US, it tends to be two. I think having two narratives (even if both are wrong) is better than having just one.
I mean to give a different example, I'm more likely to believe a new source from Taiwan than I am to believe one from mainland China. Especially if it's something that is against the Chinese government. Knowing how little free speech exists in China, I just canít have any trust in anything their media says.
In one country I shall not name
, the agencies flat out bought every independent newspaper, every TV network, etc through dummy companies. So, it becomes logical to assume everything you hear / read is propaganda. Nothing is really real.
I guess you can say Western media / politics is more eventful, lol. At least regarding local issues. And it being dynamic, means it's more likely to evolve, though within limits. Limits can be good and bad (good = you can't just vote in a dictator, bad = if something is really wrong with the whole system it will never really change).
The polarization does seem ridiculous though. I was watching a horror / comedy movie a few days ago, about the liberal elite hunting down conservative. It was weird because even trump tweeted about how bad it is that this movie exists or something, even though the ďprotagonistĒ was a conservative
. Itís crazy though because I think the movie is just a dumb movie, lol.
Speaking of social issues the UK mainstream media is typically anti-trans both left and right but the left in the US isn't so it's important to note differences throughout the West too depending on the topic. To the point where journalists from different countries from a single news source will have issues with each other:
There are also far left groups that are anti trans in the UK and not subtly like full on reactionary, this is pretty much unheard of in the US I think.
Hm. Iíd have assumed the UK to be more liberal than the US in general. I donít know though. I think my default nowadays is to assume that everyone is virtue signaling until it makes more sense to assume otherwise. And the whole process of people unconsciously virtue signaling opinions because it is whatever is 'good' to believe today is very unstable imo.
I was watching (another) horror movie a few days / weeks ago with people being forced to kill each other and so on (notice the trend? : P). Anyway, there was one hijabi woman in the crowd and I kept waiting for the cringe moment, I was sure it was coming, and yes, they had to add the cringe moment of the Muslim woman telling a bunch of people to stop kicking a guy to death before being shot herself without killing anyone because she is so peaceful :/
I donít know. I just hate that stuff. Not sure what it has to do with news, but whatever.
I guess the only time I would care for that stuff if it affected how the average people empathize or vote for my group. But I donít think I really trust peopleís empathy that much, I think itís more of a feel-good thing. So maybe it's just not as socially rewarding to be pro-trans in the UK as in the US? or maybe the opposite? like being less socially alienated if you're anti-trans (in liberal circles I mean).
I think Britain and France had an interest in ruling/control on top of just plowing for resources which is what the US primarily wants. That and to stamp out leftist governments. They've not really been concerned with the wreckage they leave behind because they're not very concerned with ownership. That being said colonialism is all trash, and the UK and France have teamed up with the US a bunch of times too for various bull**** too. Another thing is advances in weapons technology and power imbalances over time.
I don't know. I honestly feel the US is just clueless sometimes. Which I hope isn't true.