Fish in a barrel

Journalists have found a new way to insult the peasants.

Subhead: A new study finds that the poor, those with less education, young people, and women are less likely to prefer “impartial” news sources over those that align with their own views.

Reality: “Impartial” news is even more starkly aristocratic than “partial” news. “Impartial” news is long-form “investigative” pieces, usually multi-part, with lots of big words, insider jokes, and literary and academic references. Plus footnotes and bibliography in APA form, naturellement.

“Impartial” news is solely meant to be read by other journalists. “Impartial” news is explicitly designed to keep out the riffraff. When Nieman boosts some new “local” news source, it’s always long-form “investigations” of local Repooflican corruption while ignoring local Democrat corruption. These efforts inevitably fail and inevitably blame the “low information” peasants who stubbornly refuse to be re-educated.

I keep trying the advertised “impartial” news sources. So far all turn out to be either standard MSNBC crap or hifalutin philosophy. I don’t need to consume either type, especially since I produce enough of the latter for free.