I read that (worth it sort of) and there are a few takeaways, but for me the big one is realising that the author seems to think that there is "an answer" out there, that "everyone else" knows it and that he (the author) ought to be told it upfront. And any indication that people change their minds, get things wrong or otherwise screw up is an indication that people are not just lying but hiding the truth.
It took a while to realise this. Am glad I read it.
That's not the impression that I got from the thread. Rather, the problem seems to be the aggression and utter certainty that the media assumes when it conveys it's narratives. There is no room for nuance or doubt, no impression of the other side except as racists or impressionable fools. The author's point isn't that the media shouldn't be allowed to change their minds, it's that the media should exhibit even a modicum of accountability, honesty, and humility in it's reporting.
And two people take different views from the same source ... that's the problem in a nutshell :-)
But yes, I find certainty puts me off. Its the big axiom for every superhero movie out there. (IF we are certain that that guy there is a bad evil person about to do bad evil things then, hell, yes, Hulk can smash, or shoot him with an arrow / laser / Hammer). All good.
Any possibility that he is not evil ... or that he has a valid agenda. Well we are back in the real world again.
It took a while to realise this. Am glad I read it.