Even if Biden has Parkinsons, it's not a disease that impacts the brain quickly in most situations. He's 81, and a little Parkinson's isn't that uncommon. Look at Michael J. Fox, who lived for years and years and has maintained his mental faculties.
There's no aversion, but it is important to keep the context intact. The New York Post for example is not a trusted publication, nor is Fox News trustworthy. For The New York Times we have testimony from employees/journalists who admit that the higher ups have a personal grudge with Biden and are pushing as much anti-Biden content as possible. As for CNN, it has drifted further right in the last couple of years due to a change of ownership and is also pushing almost exclusively anti-Biden stories while ignoring Trump, Agenda 47 and Project 2025.I really don’t understand the aversion some people have to posting stories from trusted publications.
CNN had tacked so hard to the left a few years back that it had gone past MSNBC and had pretty much flushed its reputation down the toilet. Since the ejection of Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, et al., it seems like they’re trying to reclaim their old down-the-middle stance.As for CNN, it has drifted further right in the last couple of years due to a change of ownership
I don't think that's true at all, but it's certainly true that they've brought in a bunch of ex-Fox staffers and are trying to do the business of selling news. Lemon was probably their "leftiest" anchor and he was far from being a left winger.CNN had tacked so hard to the left a few years back that it had gone past MSNBC and had pretty much flushed its reputation down the toilet. Since the ejection of Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, et al., it seems like they’re trying to reclaim their old down-the-middle stance.
It's because it's a relative rather than absolute term.Trying to paint CNN as being "hard left" or similar nonsense is objectively incorrect. They've never been a left wing institution. People seem to have huge difficulties with parsing what "left" even means.
I don't think that's true at all
People who have spent more time quantifying this disagree. CNN’s primetime programming leaned further left than MSNBC’s starting around 2015. Also, when Jeff Zucker took over CNN in 2012 he stated that his goal for the channel was to offer an "attitude and a take" to viewers, which he did, until he left the channel in 2022.Trying to paint CNN as being "hard left" or similar nonsense is objectively incorrect.
Did you even read the article you posted? Or did you just google for something that you thought would support your argument? Because I don't think that article says what you think it says.People who have spent more time quantifying this disagree. CNN’s primetime programming leaned further left than MSNBC’s starting around 2015. Also, when Jeff Zucker took over CNN in 2012 he stated that his goal for the channel was to offer an "attitude and a take" to viewers, which he did, until he left the channel in 2022.
But boy, it sure sounds commanding when you declare something to be “objectively incorrect”, then don’t provide any objective evidence at all to back up that viewpoint!
Yes, of course I did.Did you even read the article you posted?
It looked at 10 years of programming, and you used a value spanning all 10 years to supposedly refute my point, which was about a hard tack to the left a few years back that was only recently corrected. In other words, not a valid measurement of my point.Because I don't think that article says what you think it says.
In other words, it does support my argument, but because the difference in magnitude isn’t gigantic you’re choosing to act like maybe it doesn’t support my argument after all. Gotcha.You can say that CNN leaned further, but they were statistically similar during the entire period, and the left and centre moves are fairly similar. I don't think it meaningfully supports your arguments
No, it doesn't support your argument because for a good portion of the time in Zucker's term, CNN was more centre, then it was slightly more left, then it was again more centre. You said that Zucker moved CNN lefter than MSNBC, which isn't true. Zucker moved CNN more to the centre, during which MSNBC moved more to the centre, then moved left with MSNBC, and MSNBC moved further left. For a period of time during the Zucker years, CNN was slightly more left, but for more of the time, CNN was more to the centre, and during that period it was more meaningfully to the centre, as pointed out by the average.In other words, it does support my argument, but because the difference in magnitude isn’t gigantic you’re choosing to act like maybe it doesn’t support my argument after all. Gotcha.
What I actually said was “CNN had tacked so hard to the left a few years back that it had gone past MSNBC and had pretty much flushed its reputation down the toilet.” It had wound up left of MSNBC by 2015, left of Zucker’s starting point by 2018, then continued to tack left through 2021, though MSNBC passed it again around that time.No, it doesn't support your argument because for a good portion of the time in Zucker's term, CNN was more centre, then it was slightly more left, then it was again more centre. You said that Zucker moved CNN lefter than MSNBC, which isn't true.
If you consider 3 full years “quickly”.Then as they tacked left, MSNBC quickly tacked further left.