Summary
Elon Musk’s address to Germany’s far-right AfD party, where he downplayed Germany’s Nazi past and criticized multiculturalism, has sparked global alarm.
Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America, called the remarks “incredibly dangerous,” warning of their potential to embolden right-wing extremists and threaten Jewish security worldwide.
Critics highlighted Musk’s alignment with far-right ideologies, including his Nazi salutes at Trump’s inauguration.
it’s the job of the press to tell us what we’re seeing and why
That’s a pretty dangerous way to approach other people. Journalists are just as capable of error or corruption as everyone else.
They don’t even need error or corruption to be unknowingly biased, using hegemonic framing, working within capitalist/racist/patriarchical institutions, etc.
That’s the far worse and far realer danger than people just making individual mistakes.
I’d argue that you’ve just described one source of error, but it still furthers my point that allowing strangers to tell you what you’re seeing and why will not result in providing you an accurate picture of reality, and potentially return a highly distorted one.
So do you have an alternative in mind, or are you just arguing that we shouldn’t read?
Of course they’re capable of error and corruption, every human being is. That’s why they ideally need institutions behind them to protect them and ensure they’re only reporting the truth. The point of a free press is to describe events as they happened and provide context, which serves as the first draft of history. They’ll certainly make errors here and there, but as long as they accurately describe reality, offer explanations based on history and uncompromising contemporary interviews, as well as promptly correct any mistakes with humility, then they’ve done their job. I don’t see how that’s the least bit dangerous.
they ideally need institutions behind them to protect them and ensure they’re only reporting the truth.
lol you should check out who owns and runs the institutions sometime.
as long as they accurately describe reality, offer explanations based on history and uncompromising contemporary interviews, as well as promptly correct any mistakes with humility, then they’ve done their job. I don’t see how that’s the least bit dangerous.
What’s dangerous is believing in this nonsense.
