Accurate and thought-provoking. Sometimes I encounter friends who maintain their political and religious identities via an upsetting (to me) level of self-delusion/denial. I have to wonder how many people lack a genuine sense of themselves, whose outward presentation rests on a rickety scaffold of internal self-deception.
Yes, Ian. And these are unusual times, though they are redolent of Nixonian tricks. I am not suggesting a permanent boycott. But it is an interesting thought experiment to think how denying Trump media attention would affect him. I think it would be like denying him oxygen. And there is another side to it. If you read Tim Snyder, Anne Applebaum, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt and others, this is how it starts. He is controlling the press, chilling them. The only guardrails that are currently holding are the courts (pretty much) and the press. There should be some proportional response to Trump's unconscionable trespass of Constitutional norms.
I think you are right on two points. First, his need for attention is a major driver of what he says and threatens. Second, historically t the first step taken by would be Dictators is to seize control of the media But the Media has profoundly changed in recent times and is changing even as I type this . I think the new route to autocracy is through the Courts. And it is no accident that Impeachment petitions have been filed against three of the Federal Judges who have issued Preliminary Injunctions against the Administration and that Trump's Department of Injustice has launched an investigation against Covington because it dared to represent Jack Smith who is also under investigation and now, most recently, the FCC Chair is to deliver his "report" to some Republican Caucus on George Soros' financial investments in radio stations. I think there needs to be .Media Coverage each and every time any member of the MAGA leadership opens its mouth
Jamie, you need to reconcile or explain how you think this Comment is consistent with your suggested Media Boycott of a Presidential Press Conference as a response to the Presidential boycott of AP. Boycotting a Press Conference is a form of saying that the statements made at the conference ---whether true or false---should be ignored. Here you say that there is a moral and at some level a Constitutional Duty to call out falsity. I think that statement is correct which is why we invested blood and tears in First Amendment cases. But a group boycott is a form of withdrawal from the duties of a journalist, so the boycott idea seems an abdication of First Amendment Rights and Duties
Yes, Ian. And these are unusual times, though they are redolent of Nixonian tricks. I am not suggesting a permanent boycott. But it is an interesting thought experiment to think how denying Trump media attention would affect him. I think it would be like denying him oxygen. And there is another side to it. If you read Tim Snyder, Anne Applebaum, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt and others, this is how it starts. He is controlling the press, chilling them. The only guardrails that are currently holding are the courts (pretty much) and the press. There should be some proportional response to Trump's unconscionable trespass of Constitutional norms.
There is nothing new about a Presidential effort to “control” the media; Lincoln attempted it in his tense dealings with Horace Greeley; both Roosevelts did it , especially Franklin’s response to the opposition to the New Deal and the Lend Lease program and Nixon did it even after he was removed from the Presidency. They all failed to a significant degree because the Media and the public would not stand for it. The same thing is happening this time even though the suppression efforts are more extreme and lawless. An amusing example of how th public reacts: the Citiy of San Diego had a DEI Advisory Committee. It still does but the name now is the Committee on Cultural Coordination
Finally.
#ChristianNationalistHypocrisy
And Texas is posting the 10 commandments in PublicSchools.
Accurate and thought-provoking. Sometimes I encounter friends who maintain their political and religious identities via an upsetting (to me) level of self-delusion/denial. I have to wonder how many people lack a genuine sense of themselves, whose outward presentation rests on a rickety scaffold of internal self-deception.
Thanks, Forrest! And nice turn of phrase! "Rickety scaffold of internal self-deception"! I want to read your blog!
I haven't had time to give my blog much attention since the pandemic! Unfortunately, this entry is still topical. https://sassafrascottage.com/2021/10/14/self-possession-womens-march-2021/
Eloquently stated, my friend!
Thanks, Britt! Hope you are well!
Yes, Ian. And these are unusual times, though they are redolent of Nixonian tricks. I am not suggesting a permanent boycott. But it is an interesting thought experiment to think how denying Trump media attention would affect him. I think it would be like denying him oxygen. And there is another side to it. If you read Tim Snyder, Anne Applebaum, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt and others, this is how it starts. He is controlling the press, chilling them. The only guardrails that are currently holding are the courts (pretty much) and the press. There should be some proportional response to Trump's unconscionable trespass of Constitutional norms.
I think you are right on two points. First, his need for attention is a major driver of what he says and threatens. Second, historically t the first step taken by would be Dictators is to seize control of the media But the Media has profoundly changed in recent times and is changing even as I type this . I think the new route to autocracy is through the Courts. And it is no accident that Impeachment petitions have been filed against three of the Federal Judges who have issued Preliminary Injunctions against the Administration and that Trump's Department of Injustice has launched an investigation against Covington because it dared to represent Jack Smith who is also under investigation and now, most recently, the FCC Chair is to deliver his "report" to some Republican Caucus on George Soros' financial investments in radio stations. I think there needs to be .Media Coverage each and every time any member of the MAGA leadership opens its mouth
Jamie, you need to reconcile or explain how you think this Comment is consistent with your suggested Media Boycott of a Presidential Press Conference as a response to the Presidential boycott of AP. Boycotting a Press Conference is a form of saying that the statements made at the conference ---whether true or false---should be ignored. Here you say that there is a moral and at some level a Constitutional Duty to call out falsity. I think that statement is correct which is why we invested blood and tears in First Amendment cases. But a group boycott is a form of withdrawal from the duties of a journalist, so the boycott idea seems an abdication of First Amendment Rights and Duties
Yes, Ian. And these are unusual times, though they are redolent of Nixonian tricks. I am not suggesting a permanent boycott. But it is an interesting thought experiment to think how denying Trump media attention would affect him. I think it would be like denying him oxygen. And there is another side to it. If you read Tim Snyder, Anne Applebaum, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt and others, this is how it starts. He is controlling the press, chilling them. The only guardrails that are currently holding are the courts (pretty much) and the press. There should be some proportional response to Trump's unconscionable trespass of Constitutional norms.
There is nothing new about a Presidential effort to “control” the media; Lincoln attempted it in his tense dealings with Horace Greeley; both Roosevelts did it , especially Franklin’s response to the opposition to the New Deal and the Lend Lease program and Nixon did it even after he was removed from the Presidency. They all failed to a significant degree because the Media and the public would not stand for it. The same thing is happening this time even though the suppression efforts are more extreme and lawless. An amusing example of how th public reacts: the Citiy of San Diego had a DEI Advisory Committee. It still does but the name now is the Committee on Cultural Coordination