[tedks]

The answer is that those things are not valuable. People don't want news. This is not a bad thing. This means that people aren't like the elitist ideal of what you want in your socialist utopia.

Real people happen to like Facebook and Fox News and Snapchat and Yo. And that's fine. To say that those desires are somehow immoral because they aren't lofty enough is elitist, condescending, and anti-humanist.

[Karellen]

I'm not sure it's entirely correct to claim that the set of "things that people want" is equivalent to the set of "things that add value to people's lives".

I'm also unsure as to how arguing that such a distinction might exist could be construed as elitist, condescending, or anti-humanist. And I've no idea at all how you got the idea that it might imply that the desires, of people, for things which do not add value to their lives, are immoral.

(That is, that the desires are immoral, not the people. Crikey that last sentence is hard to parse. Sorry.)

Or socialist? WTF?