The Atlantic Is A Shitty Propaganda Rag Run By Elitist Wankers

submitted by [deleted] from caitlinjohnstone.substack.com

all 14 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]CleverFoolOfEarth 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Well, yes, now tell me something I didn't already know.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

yup, thanks for the chuckle.

[–][deleted]  (9 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Countach_3D 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Caitlin Johnstone makes as much sense as tits on a turtle.

    Perhaps you simply ought work on your reading comprehension.

    While it may be a hyperbolic to refer to an entire 150-year-old publication that has published Mark Twain, Martin Luther King, Wm. F. Buckley, and David Foster Wallace as "a shitty propaganda rag," I think the central premises hold up:

    that Applebaum's piece is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible, and that fears of popular speech are rooted in elitism.

    It may be somewhat tenuous to link the two and assign such a position to The Atlantic's editorial board as a whole but as usual Ms. Johnstone + Mr. Foley's analyses provide insight into consensus manufacture in the West.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    I am sure we on Saidit could drum up a bunch of them, on both left and right.

    Sadly, I don't think I can come up with any media outlet that does not have very significant special interest or ideological biases of one sort or another. They are all consortiums of like-minded ideologues or run by billionaires with special interests (Lorraine Powell-JObs in the case of the Atlantic, under whose leadership the quality of journalism has significantly devolved )

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

      According to your own source, "The Atlantic Bias Rating Moved from Lean Left to Left in October 2022 Small Group Editorial Review"

      https://www.allsides.com/news-source/atlantic

      Reuters is Centrist my ass

      https://www.allsides.com/blog/media-bias-alert-ap-and-reuters-one-sided-fact-checks-mass-formation-psychosis

      https://www.allsides.com/blog/media-bias-alert-reuters-police-killing-akron-jayland-walker

      https://www.allsides.com/blog/media-bias-alert-reuters-fact-checks-opinion-about-transgender-women-sports

      All of the bias alerts are left leaning biases, yet they are listed as centrist, bullshit

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        I wouldn't say Caitlin is unbiased either, she is a radical anti-authoritarian left wing extremist, and her writing is extremely inflammatory. She's the equivalent of Rachel Maddow or Tucker Carlsen, just from an ideological perspective much closer to mine.

        Caitlin has a knack for over-the-top hyperbole, but I generally agree with her about the biases of the Atlantic, and honestly the majority of what she says. She defends China more than I am comforatble with is my main criticism of her politics

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          She writes a lot about the destruction of the environment in relation to capitalism and corporate interests, which I would think you would agree largely agree with. I'll browse through and find a few articles you might not hate

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Oh and heres a better for one your Reuters

          James C. Smith was the President and CEO of Reuters at the same time he is on the board of Pfizer and fact checking safety claims about their vaccines. That is a significant and direct conflict of interest

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Smith_(business_executive)

          Thomson Reuters named him COO in 2011[7] and CEO in January 2012.[8] In February 2020, Steve Hasker succeeded Smith as President and CEO of Thomson Reuters. Involved with initiatives such as the international business council of the World Economic Forum, he is also on the board of Pfizer.[9]

          A director of Pfizer, Inc. since June 26, 2014,[15][9]

          If this isn't special interest bias I don't know what is, Reuters should have recused themselves from fact checking the safety of any of those vaccines or not allowed their president and CEO to sit on that board

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          Is not all media some type of propaganda? Does your car really "love" shell gasoline? All commercials attempt to propagandize you, turning you into the merchandize not money. Is this not the essence of propaganda?

          [–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          I'd say that propaganda/PR is not just pushing a certain viewpoint or even lying. It is using psychological techniques from Freudian theory to manipulate the way people see things.

          Propaganda is a modern phenomenon with a specific cultural origin. Widening the definition makes it harder to call out.

          See The Century of the Self by Adam Curtis. https://youtu.be/DnPmg0R1M04

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Part of the opinion expressed in my comment comes from watching The Century of Self more than once. It is Freud's nephew Edward Barneys that sticks out the most about watching BBC's four hour documentary.

          [–]Countach_3D 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          Yes, and it's also a source of some of the best contemporary writing from the U.S. and elsewhere. Whaddaya gonna do? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

          It's always represented the consensus of centrist thought, but it also allows dissidents willing to push the boundaries of that discursive fairway (you may appreciate this cover story aimed squarely at its élite readership, for example).
          do love the johnstones though

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          It's always represented the consensus of centrist thought

          I'd say this used to be true. I was subscriber of the Atlantic for more than a decade, but I don't think this has been the case since Powell-Jobs acquired them in 2019. I no longer subscribe to this magazine as it is full of political hit pieces and blatant propaganda

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Haven't we pretty much already proved that your political ideas are irrelevant and uninformed? Isn't it kind of pointless to say you did or did not subscribe to any given journalist outlet for any given amount of time? Shouldn't I probably disregard what you do or do not consider propaganda and "hit-pieces"?