[Scubabear68]

In my experience, local reporting has stagnated so badly that they now survive by kissing up to whoever is in power. The majority of pieces are puff pieces commissioned by the subject or friend of the subject, be it a school superintendent or local town council or what have you.

And yes, the bias is heavily to the left. I am very centrist in my views so a left or right leaning bias would be upsetting.

We live across the river from Bucks County PA in NJ, Bucks County journalism and the NJ equivalent are just shills.

[alephnerd]

Local journalism has always been like this even before the "death" of local journalism. No local publisher would dare risk access to local politicans nor risk public ad revenue.

This is also why I'm not convinced about public owned or funded journalism that isn't a cooperative, because that only gives additional power to the incumbent who holds the purse strings.

[thunderfork]

If the bias is towards power, why would it ever be towards the left?

[bpt3]

Because they live in NJ, generally a Democratic stronghold and particularly in the area he described.

There are many parts of the US where the local government is 100% controlled by Democrats, so they are in power in those areas.

[appointment]

Thunderfork's question stands: if they are biased towards power (democrats), how can they also be biased towards the left?

[bpt3]

I figured that was the semantic game he (and you apparently) are playing.

1. The Democratic Party represents the left in the US, so the left is in power when they are in power.

2. In other parts of the world, parties and individuals who are further left on the political spectrum than the US Democratic Party (either nationally or in any location under discussion here) obtain power. As those are generally repressive regimes, their media is generally highly biased in their direction, making them biased towards both the left and the people on power.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion, feel free to stop being coy.

[thunderfork]

What you're demonstrating is that "left" and "right" are not useful terms for this sort of conversation. If you mean Dems, say Dems. If you mean "they don't agree with me on xyz", say that.

Saying "they're biased towards the left" is bereft of actual meaning, with such a wide range of interpretation that it's not useful for discussion.

[bpt3]

They absolutely are useful terms, as defined by the vast majority of the US population.

Dems = left in the US. They are interchangeable in nearly all situations, including this one where the meaning of the original comment was extraordinarily clear to anyone who isn't trying to prove a point.