Another unpopular position from an unpopular political writer
There’s no shortage of blame for the current political state we are in.
Certain political parties are responsible. Certain politicians are responsible. Certain voters are responsible. The education system that educated those voters is responsible. Everyone else and everything else is responsible. Except the complainer.
And often, the media is blamed.
In this essay, I shall offer my perspectives on the media’s part in the blame game.
Challenges of Good Journalism
The list below is Journalism 101.
1) Fact-checking: Journalists are required to go beyond opinion or a few anecdotes.
2) Simplification: Journalism is prepared for the masses.
3) Presentation: There are skills for creating reliable stories that are attractive for a big, non-expert audience.
4) Fairness: Both sides of an issue should get to voice their side.
5) Word choice: A shift of a few words can put a certain bias into a story.
6) Prioritize stories: Decisions are made to headline, bury, or cut stories.
7) Deadlines: Media outlets have deadlines, which affect the quality of the other six points.
It is much easier to prepare this list than to practice it. That’s why most journalists go to journalism schools. And as new journalists get their first jobs and watch their mentors, they learn even more. Journalism is not a job that people off the street can do.
All occupations have some degree of subjectivity. Ask a lawyer whether a certain civil case will win or fail. Ask an engineer about trade-offs in a particular project. Ask an accountant about reporting business income to pay appropriate taxes. Ask an oncologist the best way to fight cancer. There is no one right way to do many professional tasks.
Journalism has more than the usual subjectivity. So it is easier for some journalists to not follow the seven above points fully — and still call themselves journalists. To my knowledge, there is no professional association that certifies and decertifies journalists.
So as much as we want perfection in the news we consume, this perfection is unrealistic. But we should still expect our news to be mostly right, most of the time.
The Complainers
I’ve encountered many articles about how the mainstream media has failed to adequately warn Americans about the intent of Donald Trump and the Republican Party. They believe the media was soft on both the Trump 1.0 and 2.0 administrations. I disagree.
During the Trump 1.0 administration, I was watching most of my American news on CNN. I thought this media outlet was biased against Donald Trump. It would not look at the good angles of why the Trump 1.0 administration might be doing what it was doing, focusing on the outward presentations of an inept presidency.
I watched some MSNBC. Compared to CNN, MSNBC was more aggressive in reporting the foolishness of Donald Trump. In my opinion, this outlet’s bias was too big. They were deliberately telling the news in this way to appease their hard-earned audience. I stopped watching this news program.
For the Trump 2.0, I mostly watch PBS Newshour. To compare PBS against CNN, I would say PBS is more focused on facts, and CNN has a more sensationalist slant.
In the early days of Trump 2.0, PBS Newshour was finding all sorts of ways to mention that Trump promised to end the Ukraine/Russia war 24 hours after he assumed the presidency— and 24 hours passed a long time ago. While I thought this message was overkill, I could not see how PBS Newshour could be accused of being soft on Trump.
From what I could see, much of the mainstream media was not friendly to the Trump administration.
So what are the media complainers looking for? Do they want a separate news show called Silly Things the President Said and Did? Do they want the government to clamp down on the pro-Trump media? What’s the solution?
I had no trouble finding media outlets that portray both Mr. Trump’s presidencies in a bad light. They only needed to show what Mr. Trump said and did. The discerning reader can figure things out.
The Media is Fragmented
Fifty years ago, we complained that the media were all reporting the same news in the same way. Flip a channel or buy a second newspaper, and the same news came back to us. Almost as if the media were checking up on each other before publishing an original story. The critics of the media were quick to point out that many good stories were being ignored because no outlet wanted to be that much different than the other outlets.
For whatever reason, we have gone past that copycat media culture. We now have a fragmented media. We can get our news in different styles. This allows different stories and different angles. Add the internet with more independent minds, and any good story could find its way around the gatekeepers of the mainstream media.
I am an example of this change. I am an inventor of an alternative democracy. Fifty years ago, there would have been no way for a nobody like me to get my ideas “out there.” Today, I use my website, Medium, Mastodon, LinkedIn, and Substack to present my ideas.
While the results are not to my liking, I can’t say gatekeepers were preventing this democracy from getting attention. I have found enough readers. If they liked my ideas, they would be reading me more — and the algorithms would pick up on that. I have had enough exposure to realize that the world is not ready for my ideas.
And until I can gather significant support for my new democracy, the mainstream media has no obligation to promote what is essentially a “one-man show with no audience.” I cannot blame the media.
While the new fragmented media has given people like me more opportunities to get new ideas and perspectives “out there,” it allows a citizen to find the media outlets that work on his or her confirmation bias, which we all are susceptible to. In other words, many of us find the news outlets that tell us what we want to believe.
Dave Being a Journalist
I have some Medium experience that shows how the media is forced to present itself to the public in a constrained way.
Last September, I published a Medium article about the USA’s SA Troopers.
About a year previous, I saw my first Mastodon post about the blue-shirts-brown-pants gang in Mastodon. I immediately saw the uncanny similarity between this group and the Nazi SA storm troopers. In fact, I was expecting some American white men to be given a sense of purpose like this.
But the little-journalist-in-me said that one post does not make a news story. I was cautious about what could be a fabrication.
More blue-shirts-brown-pants posts came on my Mastodon feed. Different angles, different places, different times, different websites. But the same uniforms and masks. If this group was a fabrication, it was cleverly done.
Eventually, I did a little internet research. This group is called the Patriotic Front. It is well organized; they are often doing little parades carrying flags and shouting slogans for an hour or so — all across the USA. Some sources say ICE is getting many of its new agents from this group.
So why is the mainstream media not reporting much on the Patriotic Front?
Could it be that this group has already been active to the point where their little parades are not that newsworthy?
Could it be that the left-leaning media have a tacit agreement not to give this group any exposure?
Could it be that the media outlet fears retribution from this group?
I don’t know.
So what does my Patriotic Front article have to do with “blaming the media”?
An interesting angle to this article is that it became my second-best performer on Medium in 2025. Even though it was published seven months ago, it is still getting Medium traction today. It has been my best performer so far in 2026.
Medium readers are giving me a signal. If I want more popularity and prosperity, I should be writing articles about the Patriotic Front, not any new democracy.
So far, USA’s SA Troopers has earned $14.44 for me. Not exactly a revenue stream that will elevate my current socioeconomic position. So I can afford to ignore the signal — and put my time and energy more into teaching the world about a new democracy.
My new democracy articles earn about $0.50 each. While I suspect most readers spurn my new-democracy message, at least I have engaged them to think in a way to spurn me. My Patriotic Front article only feeds their confirmation bias.
The Economics of Today’s Media
The social forces around my Patriotic Front article have a parallel perspective in the mainstream media. I can make the choice between popular and unpopular articles. However, the media outlet has a much bigger challenge than I.
The media outlet’s audiences, directly or indirectly, pay the expenses to keep the media outlet functioning. It has so many bills to pay that I don’t have to pay: (1) journalist salaries, (2) technician salaries, (3) management and support staff salaries, (4) facility and operations, (5) many other expenses. Obviously, a city-wide newspaper or a TV news station has a big budget. Without a large enough audience, the media outlet cannot move into the ranks of “mainstream.”
So once the outlet builds its news delivery technique, its audience, and business matrix, it cannot suddenly change its course. Its audience can leave anytime if the news is no longer agreeable. If a media outlet loses 20% of its current audience, it might not survive to deliver the news anymore.
So the media outlet just cannot say: “Let’s change our format to be more in line with better journalism” or “Let’s go after a competitor’s audience and educate that audience.” The media outlet must take care of its current audience first. And it has hired business managers to analyze the business numbers and tell the journalists when they are moving into a “less revenue” direction.
So most media outlets do not have the same freedom that I have. I can forego 90% of my potential revenue to pursue a noble cause; the mainstream media outlets cannot handle a 20% drop.
To digress, I have offered a new model to finance the media in the future. You might want to read about it.
The Oligarchy is Coming Around the Mountain
The media complainers (of the left-wing variety) would like a big neon light flashing "Donald Trump will turn the USA into an oligarchy."
Given the stakes of this outcome, we could argue that this headline deserves more attention. So why isn’t the media doing this?
I would say that the media (in general) has been putting the facts out there such that a discerning citizen would conclude that an oligarchy is plausible. We don’t need the neon sign.
And a neon sign might be counterproductive. If the oligarchy angle is reported over and over and over, other news stories get cut. Then the media outlet could be cast as fixated on one issue and having a political agenda. I suspect the journalism schools would say media outlets cannot emphasize one story or only a few stories — and still maintain credibility of being a fair media outlet.
“Yeah, but Dave, the USA is still heading for an oligarchy,” you might say, “The people need to be warned. The media is not issuing enough warnings.”
Sorry, Americans have already made their choices.
Like it or not, 30% of Americans want this oligarchy. Some in this 30% might be a little frustrated with the current leader, but politics quickly changes, and the Republicans can find a new leader. Until the polls go below 30%, I say there should be no dancing in the streets if the current leader suddenly dies or loses the 2026 election. This 30% will still be a big political force regardless of how the elections in 2026 and 2028 turn out.
And there is another 40% that usually do not vote. They might vote in 2026 and 2028. They could flip the result in the USA’s many coin-flip elections, giving the Democratic Party a big upset victory.
But I don’t think the Democratic Party will be able to “unmaga MAGA.” Many soft-support voters will not vote in 2030 and 2032.
The Democratic Party Cannot Save the USA
So the USA will repeat the last 10 years in the next 10 years.
A Pyrrhic Victory, is it not?
And we want to blame the media for this mess.
Sorry, all media outlets have been pointing to the upcoming oligarchy attempt.
The Couching of the News
There is another force in the media these days. I’m going to bring back the SA Stormtroopers of Nazi Germany again. This paramilitary group harassed journalists and vandalized presses that were unfriendly to the Nazis.
Today, there’s nothing to stop their American equivalents from taking the law into their own hands again. I suspect they are already harassing their opponents; I feel sorry for those public and media officials who have to put up with their threats. The Patriotic Front is waiting for permission from their leader to do more.
The mainstream media has a balancing act. They want to report the news to be perceived as a relatively fair media outlet. So they have to mention a few bad things Donald Trump said and did to retain credibility with their current audiences — and retain their advertising revenues.
Likely journalists want to report more on the oligarchy angle. But their owners and business managers are looking to the intermediate future. The withdrawal of federal funding by executive order for PBS and NPR was a warning shot. There will be other shots fired. The media outlet that sticks out the highest will be the next target, either by legislation, prosecution, executive order, cyberattacks, or thuggery. Executive order seems to be the modus operandi these days.
Once taken out, a media outlet will be hard to rebuild — even if the USA returns to its more normal democracy of pre-2016. If you were the owner of a left-leaning media outlet with a big audience, would you willingly sacrifice your outlet? No, you would be putting some limits on your journalists and editors — while still being somewhat reasonable with reporting the news. Besides, your audience will still be able to read between the lines.
So there is an informal balancing act for the media outlets to deliver the news and soften that news at the same time. No media outlet wants to be the nail that sticks out the highest.
Conclusion
If the various audience segments don’t get what they want to hear, they will move to other sources of news.
It is naïve to assume that all the mainstream media outlets can move toward better journalism. Their business matrix will constrain them.
The outlets are not doing that bad of a job. Everyone knows a Republican oligarchy is plausible.
Blaming the media is mostly a smokescreen for what really ails the USA.
The USA needs a new democracy. A kinder, wiser democracy. A democracy that won’t elect someone who will put fear into the media for reporting the news.
Published on Medium 2026
The Environment, Politics, and Carl Sagan
Why is Science Fiction Holding Us Back?
