There's something that desperately needs to be said. To get to the urgency right away, AOC and the squad were mostly irrelevant on the left until we began talking about them. Nancy Pelosi saw how to do it, and ate ice cream and other calculated storms in a coffee cup to get the right to talk about her night and day, and her powerful position in the eyes of her peers was restored. The left says such insane things we report about them night and day like it's news.
When an Arab called in on a show with Rav Kahane, they say much worse than the democrats, (G-d forbid) "we will kill all the Jews and drive Israel into the sea and blah blah". He said nothing, the host asked him for one, he said no response, host said why, and the Rav replied, "when a dog barks you don't bark back". To take it to another angle, you don't look odd when a dog barks at you, everyone knows it happens, you do if you bark back.
Responding to the claims of the left is important, you don't know your own argument until you know the opposing one because until then it's just knowledge and not an argument. Making them famous like these are the names in modern philosophy we're supposed to know makes us look weak.
The right media is happy and excuses it with "well lots of new guys that are just upset with the latest demonrat proposals so we harp on that", and sure you'll keep em for a bit, but once as that energy is gone, they're gonna go somewhere to learn something. Sites like American Thinker and frontpagemag are much better on that front, but they fall for it plenty too. There's no such thing as bad marketing, there is only more attention. Their ideas are evil and need attention and it is useful to make us reinforce our stands on our own ones. When you have a society where there's one bad guy and everyone basically nice, like pre-hippy, it's effective to point out the freak trying to mess up the place. Writing articles about AOC like what she said is a newsworthy thing only makes you look like the stuck up people trying to get the different one, and it makes all the loners created by corporate society think they have affinity with her. Attacking her can be extremely useful, especially when you make her name an anecdote for stupidity, and there were some effective articles that analyzed many statements in relations to the actions of the squadettes.
The daily news in at least a few hundred thousand examples is "AOC said on twitter x", with 50% of them being "whoever we like crushed them in a respond tweet". The left only gets away with doing that for Trump because he's the president and it's just not the expected decorum to tweet as he does. They don't do daily articles laughing at what even some dumber Republicans say on twitter, not to mention Ted Cruz, because it doesn't make him look good to say "Cruz destroys X on twitter", it makes him look like an overtweeter, and it makes your news look like it's not needed because you can just go to twitter and see it first.
So 1. promote people on the left, 2. make the news organization look cheap, 3. make your supposed hero look like a useless twitter addict. This is the value of "X destroys leftist X on Twitter HUGE" articles. Instead of barking back like their verbal diarrhea (as in not even well worked out bullcrap and no restraint) is worthy of consideration, articles about what the right has to say, and then on slow news days, make a flash back on one level either to an ideal that people need to hear about now or how your hero did X that really shows it if you wanna be hacky. Once a month brining up "we have useful things to say and here's a funny list of the wackiest things demonrats did". Why are you educating them on twitter in the first place? You're not a volunteer mentor. The people need you to explain to them why these ideologies are harmful, they don't have any reason to care that their faces turned red at their twitter feeds.
This is basically the right of everywhere else. They have all these "homosexual conservatives" or just they like everything leftist but want less taxes to do more leftist things with their money and are "fiscal conservatives", and the types. As a result you can't really say you believe in anything other than you will do what the leftists do a bit better in style and people will like it more. No one cares, doesn't benefit the world to read why each specific leftist is a garbage.
The issue is when most the right in America starts talking about conservative values, their chests puff up to min 2.5x normal size and there is much pompus flapping. We don't know if America right wing ideology is the best one ever, or that will ever be. We know it's better than leftist ideology demonstrably, and then we're like we're better. I was annoyed that it said 13% of religious Jews voted for Sniffy, so I hunted conversations, and honestly I can't say I'd have done different than a few. You have these people talking about everyone outside of their narrow idea of good like they're trash and can't accept the concept that them and everything about America is less than perfect and anyone who thinks otherwise is unworthy of human consideration. These few I found voting for the left were completely conservative in their beliefs, many more so that the supposed right wing Trumplicans. They straight up told me they do it to make those arrogant people more mad. It's sad because the left does the same thing. The leftists are usually uneducated on political philosophy, despite their degrees, and so the average one won't act as "know it all" and keep his nose as high as the others. So it's this twisted situation where the left keeps their people dumb so most outside of the new generation are pretty nice, and the right puts effort to educate their people, so the ones with smaller personal development than mouths get lots of attention and we look like the party of arrogance, the great abomination that can turn the most pure good into evil.
So half the time you get an article with the classical liberal ideals being presented, it's with much chest beating and fanfare and people that aren't emotionally connected to it in the first place don't care. The result is singing to the choir and new people just see the pomp and pride. It's this seeming paradox that you're too scared to be hardcore about why right wing ideology is great so you water it down until it looks gay, and then add a bunch of gushing over and 'Murica moments so it sounds interesting again, and so if you can't be hardcore about why you're right, you have to go overboard when talking about why you are. The solution comes down to what freeking adorable Teddy butchered with "pale pastels", be proud about why you believe in, not your ego or the egos of the people you voted for, or else all you have left is your pride and the mud you threw at the pride of another, and besides the corruption to your own thinking, you also lose much more than the new members you think you got from your clickbait trash.
Topic: Left wing media has broken much of right wing media (Read 1136 times)