> I don't see anyone talking about taking that emmy back. Or canceling him.
Weirdly enough I didn't know he was given an Emmy but I have seen wall to wall coverage of the accusations against him and calls for him to resign from dozens of democrat leaders including the Senate Majority Leader.
SNL (pretty much centrist-liberal) has been trashing him on both fronts -- calling out the nursing home deaths on weekend update and even a very long cold open raking him over the coals for the abuse stuff.
Seth Meyers (easily the farthest left network host) has been dragging him hard on both fronts on Late Night as well.
The only opinions I've seen expressed by people in my social media sphere for months are that he's an absolute dirtbag - the man is canceled. I think the real point you are approaching is that most of the time "canceling" someone doesn't really do much.
I’ve noticed this really recently as well, but my conservative friends were pointing this out in 2020 back when he was on air with his brother.
Better late than never and all that, but I don’t see anything noble about waiting to speak out until it becomes politically untenable to wait any longer.
Reminds me of the collective shrug when Trudeau got caught in blackface multiple times. Good thing these guys didn’t do anything truly heinous like cracking their knuckles at work or or advocating for nonviolent protest or throwing their daughter a respectful geisha themed party. There seems to be a pattern in who gets targeted and it doesn’t seem to correlate with the severity of the offense.
>I don't see anyone talking about taking that emmy back. Or canceling him.
Look harder then. They're not difficult to find.
When you treat "media" as a monolithic, moving with unified purpose, you're going to make mistakes just like this one.
"media" is diverse enough that you kind people you can disagree with when you look. So it's no doubt true that there is media out there that is defending Cuomo. But that doesn't mean there is some vast conspiracy, or even wide spread collusion, as you seem to be implying.
> But that doesn't mean there is some vast conspiracy, or even wide spread collusion, as you seem to be implying.
Not even close to what I was saying.
And yes, the "media" as in the NBC variants, CNN, CBS, ABC, NPR, etc. seem to all mimic/amplify each others reporting. Doesn't need to be a conspiracy, and I don't think it is.
It is, however, a uniform political and cultural narrative, that actively defends itself from information that runs counter to it. Whether or not there is coordination is irrelevant. That this collection of "media" somehow manages to bury important (real) information, in favor of what they would like to say, is highly problematic for what one might call, actual news.
So no ... to your point, I do not believe the strawman you constructed and then swatted comes anywhere close to what I was specifically talking about. However, denial of the mutual reinforcement and exclusion of information that runs counter to their collective narrative ... that's a deep and fundamental failure of critical thinking.
> And yes, the "media" as in the NBC variants, CNN, CBS, ABC, NPR, etc. seem to all mimic/amplify each others reporting.
TIL by watching multiple DVR-ed news shows from the same night while visiting family...
It is eerie the extent to which the nightly national news stories are the nearly same across the various old networks. With a whole country of stories to pick from the network news is, anecdotally, 80%+ the same many nights. Not only the topics but also the story structure, the chosen sequence of video clips, etc.
It was particularly interesting to observe with respect to the Covington Catholic affair in which the whole of the media apparatus took the exact same still-frame out of context in exactly the same way all the while the actual 2 hour video was widely circulated and freely available on the Internet. For so many media outlets to make the exact same egregious error in such a short timeframe is remarkable. See also the Google Memo fiasco.
The media is as diverse as the set of their independent owners. And what you get from any news channel is the view its owners want to show you. Thinking otherwise is plain naive as I see it.
Also all this took place when he received a multi million dollar advance for his book "American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic", and remember this crazy thing https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/arts/design/cuomo-covid-p... how is any of this real?!?!
Yeah ... I hear otherwise intelligent friends (folks with PhDs, MDs, etc.) effectively parroting crap you would hear on their favorite news channel. You can tell what they watch by listening to what they say.
I think the "smarter" one is, the more gullible they are. As someone with a PhD, I try very hard not to be gullible ... I can't say I always succeed. But I am highly skeptical of everything I hear/read. That skepticism helps.
Being educated != being smart. Intelligence is a biological phenotype of neurological potential. It's distribution is set in stone across humanity. Being lucky and born into a family that can afford your higher education that will grant you a title has nothing to do with biological intelligence. In other words, a lot of very stupid people with PhDs and MDs can parrot mass media like the "low IQ" individuals that they are.
I don’t know if I’d go that far with the set in stone nature.
I’d just say that even if someone is educated well in one field - it doesn’t mean that they’re generally well educated or that they have good critical thinking skills outside of their field. I’m surrounded by PhDs - they’re all great at their field, terrible at everything else. Min/Maxed their stats very hard there.
I believe it has something to do with someones level of "institutionalization", or perhaps, how comfortable they are with institutions and authorities themselves.
A PhD holder is a PhD holder, at least in part, because they trusted that the many 1000's of hours of study and hard work they put into to receive a certificate from an institution was worth it. And this is because they, at some level, trust the institution itself.
Presumably this trust can also transfer to other "authorities", like US cable new media companies.
He has like 7 credible assault victims accusing him. And the "media" protects him.
Riddle me that. His ass should have been out on the sidewalk a long time ago.
The "media" is complicit.