The outcome of "calling it out" for 8 years straight is a comeback with popular vote win. So I think it's reasonable to change a strategy that has failed so miserably for so long.
Indeed. The problem is that the voting base has been carefully groomed for many years to distrust independent journalism, and "calling out" anything is just perceived as partisan and not to be trusted.
>So I think it's reasonable to change a strategy that has failed so miserably
I'm not sure how a strategy of "ignore it and don't mention it" is going to perform better than "call it out"...
A working theory would be that people do not believe that there can be bad consequences until they get burned more, so things will need to get worse for a specific set of people. It's the strategy of falling to the bottom of the pool so you can push on the floor to kick yourself back up. But if you've got other ideas go for it.
That's not how I would describe the overall behavior of the media for the last 8 years.
Though obviously a large amount of people don't believe anything except what they want to hear.
I have no idea what you're saying here. For years I've been seeing people posting links to articles with either the headline or some paragraph marked up to spell out what it's trying to say. Articles using passive voice and avoiding the conclusion were common for a very long time now - as much as I appreciate listing facts rather than freaking out about results in articles, often they just fail to call a spade a spade.
The only strategy that works apparently is to let them screw up the country so badly people believe it.
loading story #43128911
America has a long history of not holding its political leaders accountable when they screw up massively. Gaslighting, obstruction, projection are pretty powerful tools.