The MSM “partly to blame” for the loss of trust in it. What tosh! It is entirely to blame. The MSM is a megaphone for the Left, and it spreads the Left's lies; that's why the M.A.D Bill won't apply to them if it is allowed to pass. Let’s see how the MSM fares under Donald Trump. He hates them, as he has every reason to.

The political class fears the “alternative” media - as they should; that's why they want it censored.

Jeff Bezos and his kind should be told to get nicked.

It was pointed out by one senior journalist last week that, were Trump to win, it would among other things prove one major point about the so-called legacy media - that the people were no longer listening to them.

Studies of the election campaign have show that 78% of all reporting on Harris was favourable toward her while only 15% favoured Trump. That's a 63% split - the largest in history. That Trump overcame that means that the legacy media no longer has the clout it once did.

Other reports show that over 90% of journalists who donated to campaigns donated to the Democrats. Unbiassed?

So people now get their media, news and views from the new media - Facebook, Google, X. While the two former ones there remain all in on helping the Democrats their ability to tailor the news is limited although they remain able to straight up censor it eg the Biden laptop. But Facebook have seen the writing on the wall and have apologised for their earlier bias.

The biggy here is X. When the history 2024 is written, Musk's purchase of X and converting it to a free speech platform will loom large. the best $42 billion ever spent. While ever there is a major mass platform that defends free speech, the censors and the biased media will be restrained. That's why the Democrats, the legacy media and the Euro elites want to close down X.

The other restraining factor here is money. Bezos is reportedly loosing $100 million per year on the Washington Post because no one is buying it any longer. Even for one of the richest men on the planet that's not chicken feed and he'd prefer to be remembered, I'm sure, as the bloke who saved the WaPo rather than the one who put the final nail in the coffin. That means moving it to the centre and providing truly unbiased reporting to a wider public. Can he do it. I'd doubt it.

But it can be done. Look at the newish website "The Free Press" to see how.... http://www.thefp.com/

mhaze

Thanks for pointing out http://www.thefp.com/