For the past week, Elon Musk has repeatedly commented about buying MSNBC. At the same time, Musk accused the news outlet of peddling "pueril
Mark Sumner at Daily Kos:
For the past week, Elon Musk has repeatedly commented about buying MSNBC. At the same time, Musk accused the news outlet of peddling "puerile propaganda" and derided MSNBC's ratings, which have—as might be expected—dropped since the election. The result has been a string of comments on Twitter and Fox News in which Trump supporters chortle over the thought of replacing Rachel Maddow with Joe Rogan and exult in the distress they believe Musk's comments must be generating on the left. Many of Musk's "jokes," and those of toadies like Rogan, have been accompanied by the kind of homophobic, racist, or misogynist memes that have come to dominate Twitter since Musk laid down $44 billion to destroy that platform. But even as Musk and his social media pals laugh, no one should consider this a farce. It's a threat. And it's not just a threat against MSNBC. Musk is signaling that he has the limitless resources and unchecked power to purchase and shutter any outlet he believes represents a threat to Donald Trump or the incoming array of kleptocrats. He can not only silence perceived critics, he can do it on a whim.
What Musk is suggesting is known as "media capture," and it's a common practice among authoritarian governments everywhere. Whether it's a long series of Russian journalists falling from windows, or Victor Orbán building a media empire that controls every scrap of news reaching the citizens of Hungary, a hallmark of authoritarian governments is that they do not tolerate independent reporting. One of the first and most obvious messages to emerge in the wake of the election earlier this month was just how uninformed and misinformed many American voters already are. In post-election interviews, many voters falsely attributed policies advocated by Kamala Harris to Trump. The policies that Trump actually ran on, from inflationary tariffs to mass deportations to the destruction of the legal system, were either missed altogether or dismissed as inconsequential political rhetoric. The reason for that is simple enough: While the right has an effective media force at every level, America has no progressive media.
When people are in their cars, radio pundits push a constant stream of fearmongering and hatred. Rush Limbaugh may have been one of the first of these toxic voices in America's ear, but he's the soul of moderation compared to many that now fill the airwaves. When people are in their homes, right-wing propaganda is always available. It's not just Fox News, Newsmax, Real America's Voice, Right Side Broadcasting Network, and One America News Network. It's The 700 Club, Great American Family, and dozens of syndicated pundits. In many cases, these pundits pop up during news programs that are nominally on NBC, ABC, or CBS stations as right-wing owners like Sinclair Broadcasting insert commentary into what are supposedly factual news programs.
When people are waiting for their tires to be changed, their teeth to be cleaned, or their meal to be prepared, there's a good chance that if there's any news programming available at all, it's a right-wing broadcast backing Trump, sowing suspicion about "others," and offering up good old American solutions couched in racism and violence. On the left, there is effectively no alternative. Some late-night comedians are willing to take Trump on, and a handful of cable programs mingle comedy with a dose of news content. However, there is no progressive news platform in the United States. Trump supporters may be quick to deride the traditional "big three" outlets, PBS, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post as if they are all the products of Karl Marx, but all of these outlets—with the exceptions of a few programs of commentary and a scattering of editorial columns—still hold to a broken concept of "balanced" coverage, even when that means leaving lies unchallenged. If anything these outlets skew distinctly right just because they are so concerned about being seen as favoring the left. Over the last decade the extent to which these outlets have bent over backward to avoid being critical of the right, while joyfully leaping on any perceived weakness of the left, has become startlingly obvious.
[...]
Here are a few random imaginary headlines that don't require more than a dime-store crystal ball.
Fox News and Newsmax exclusively allowed on military bases
White House press conferences remove journalists under investigation for "treason"
FCC moves to award Starlink nationwide contract for providing rural broadband, declares it will save billions
CNN goes dark following dispute with regulators
Congress opens investigation into censorship on BlueSky as FCC passes new rules against blocking or banning users
U.S. government agencies to use only social media platforms certified "free"
Congress insists that Sesame Street include more Christian content
None of these things have happened. Don't think for a moment that they can't. Or won't. The best move for any of the outlets not already firmly captured by the right is simply this: Report clearly. Stop trying to be fair to people who have no interest in being fair, or honest, or anything less than hateful. America needs an opposition media. It needs one quickly. Unfortunately, there are no signs of that opposition emerging. Musk may be threatening to buy MSNBC, but in the meantime, the remainder of the media is signaling that they don't need to be captured — because they are willing to capitulate.
Mark Sumner wrote on Daily Kos that the Hungarian-style media capture of outlets perceived as not 100% deferential to MAGA propaganda to turn them into megaphones of distortions as a result of Donald Trump's 2nd win is an attack on the freedoms we cherish.
See Also:
Uncharted Blue: Musk's threat to buy MSNBC is no joke
