I’ve never heard of the new republic before, but they seem to be an otherwise unremarkable progressive political magazine.
The New Republic has been around for a hundred years and is one of the most well known names in progressive media. They have turned to shit of course in the great hollowing of journalism but they aren’t a fly by night operation and in the past quite remarkable.
If that’s your argument you should see how many different rich assholes have owned it over the last century. Most recently it was acquired in 2016 by Win McCormack from Facebook cofounder Chris Hughes.
They didn’t say it was reputable, just remarkable, which doesn’t mean it’s good or accurate, just that it has had a place in the media sphere for a while.
Good to know, thanks. I’m not too familiar with the American news media, although I know there’s a lot of it around. I checked them briefly and they didn’t seem all too different from e.g. Huffington Post or other similar sites, which is why I called them unremarkable. It’s interesting to see they have a long history.
I don’t think this materially affects any of my conclusions on the article itself though.
Welcome to American media! Brand new dogshit media companies made to make profit mixed with century old names, bought and turned to shit to make profit!
Your conclusions are fine but its worse because this is not just any news paper, this is what was formerly extremely reliable, extremely well respected, media and basically the highest level authority of left journalism in the US for decades including during the October revolution and now they are publishing Democrat propaganda in place of news. The fact that you hesitate to call it a news outlet is a huge problem.
The New Republic has been around for a hundred years and is one of the most well known names in progressive media. They have turned to shit of course in the great hollowing of journalism but they aren’t a fly by night operation and in the past quite remarkable.
If that’s your argument you should see how many different rich assholes have owned it over the last century. Most recently it was acquired in 2016 by Win McCormack from Facebook cofounder Chris Hughes.
https://money.cnn.com/2016/02/26/media/new-republic-chris-hughes-win-mccormack/index.html
By your logic the new York times is reputable just because the name is the same as its always been.
They didn’t say it was reputable, just remarkable, which doesn’t mean it’s good or accurate, just that it has had a place in the media sphere for a while.
Good to know, thanks. I’m not too familiar with the American news media, although I know there’s a lot of it around. I checked them briefly and they didn’t seem all too different from e.g. Huffington Post or other similar sites, which is why I called them unremarkable. It’s interesting to see they have a long history.
I don’t think this materially affects any of my conclusions on the article itself though.
Welcome to American media! Brand new dogshit media companies made to make profit mixed with century old names, bought and turned to shit to make profit!
Your conclusions are fine but its worse because this is not just any news paper, this is what was formerly extremely reliable, extremely well respected, media and basically the highest level authority of left journalism in the US for decades including during the October revolution and now they are publishing Democrat propaganda in place of news. The fact that you hesitate to call it a news outlet is a huge problem.