[rootusrootus]

> political speech guidelines to clamp down in critique against MSM (Main Stream Media)

That is sensible, because the MSM label is primarily a label one side uses to describe media outlets that don't lean their ideological direction, while they ignore that there is absolutely no shortage of media outlets that do. So when you see someone using the loaded term, you know you're not reading a neutral analysis.

[wernercd]

"not shortage of outlets that do" The problem isn't that they are biased per se (That is a problem)...

The problem is that they pretend not to be biased and they are the largest players.

"Neutral analysis" Yet Twitter, Facebook, CNN, MSNBC, etc all promise they are "unbiased" while they let stories without facts run against targets on the right (IE: 'anon person says Trump said' or Covington Highschool kids)... while they sideline or suppress stories with actual backing facts that target the left (IE: "Laptop from Hell").

You call it a loaded term... we call it the largest players in the pond are "stopping election interference" by literally practicing election interference by deciding what's "true" even when it's easily proven they are wrong more often than right.

[barnesto]

Censorship is now "sensible."

MSM is a "loaded term."

What? MSM is anything but loaded. It's a description of the largest media platforms and that includes outlets like Fox News. And none of them provide "neutral analysis" hence the critiques.

Everything you said is wrong, imo. You're advocating censorship and labeling people you don't agree with. You might as well get a job in the MSM.

[gruez]

>MSM is anything but loaded. It's a description of the largest media platforms and that includes outlets like Fox News. And none of them provide "neutral analysis" hence the critiques.

Not really. You can argue that "fake news" is not loaded, because according to you it only means "news that are 100% fabricated with no basis in reality", but that still doesn't change the fact that a significant amount of people use it to refer to any news that they don't like.

[free_rms]

Multiple sides, actually.

Here's Jamaal Bowman, recently elected Democrat from Brooklyn, getting his mic cut by CNN the other night for criticizing Rahm Emmanuel:

https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1331295169417781249

[cfmcdonald]

It seems pretty clear from the video that the guy's video call dropped, it wasn't cut by CNN. CNN is reporting on these criticisms of Emanuel on their website: https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/24/politics/rahm-emanuel-transpo...

So if they are trying to secretly cover them up (as you seem to imply), they are doing a bad job.

[free_rms]

I wouldn't say it's 'clear' but you're right that it's at least ambiguous.

For a less ambiguous case, look at how CNN and MSNBC treated the Bernie campaign/movement. Calling them "MSM" doesn't mean that one is a reactionary, it just means that one is outside of their set of approved viewpoints in any direction.