Which one are you, Veeky Forums?

Ebin

Holy shit someone hold me

OP here, ironically you would be correct on this matter. Atleast ideologically speaking.

In fact I think the men's positions in the paper are setup like that, for a good reason.

You see, if we look at this rare newspaper from Britain more introspectively we can see that the 'progressive' thinker/man on the left side is actually a leftist. A classical liberal or Whig to be exact. I mean, why else would he be called 'Progressive'? While the moderate thinker/man on the right is a rightist or Tory.

Due to European politics and thought back then in the 1800s, conservative idealism was considered mainstream back then and thus the normies or "unenlightened majority" as you would say, would've been rightists.

The jaded, skeptical individuals or the "enlightened minority" were leftists.

>OP here
Nobody fucking cares

rude as fuck

I'm normally irked when people say history is just more of the same. But sometimes it seems so.

...

this

...

...

...

...

For whatever reason, this reminded my of this WW2 magazine article. The premise of the article is help Americans differentiate between the friendly Chinaman and the evil Jap.

Nicely done lads

Did they issue similar ones in the Korean War?

both a shit

Lefties are to blame for the absolute state of modern media.

Many old newspapers used to just stamp down facts and add only a heavily grounded analysis at the bottom. Rightists in power at the time may not have liked it, however they had a tacit respect for the educated questioner who is going to think and come up with their own conclusions. That is what "progressive" meant back then.

However now that leftists are in power they have made the bourgeois the enemy. Their logical conclusions are now magically evil somehow. Judge people on the content of their character? Look at both the advantages and disadvantages of "multiculturalism"? How dare you you racist sexist bastard! They scrape the barrel to find excuses to hate the thoughtful observant bourgeois.

It's cable news.

With a newspaper, there are thousands of them, each capable of fact-checking the others, and none of them large enough to be beholden to a major corporation

With cable news, the media is controlled by Fortune 500 companies that are primarily concerned with profit margins, and not beholden to any community, to respectability, or to the truth.

Back to /r/yellow_press

It wasn't the government, it was just LIFE magazine, which took upon itself the duty of educating its readers. LIFE was the same magazine which posted the famous (or infamous) photograph of a woman writing a "thank-you" note to her boyfriend for the Japanese skull that he sent her. The Japanese propaganda machine pounced on this image and used it as proof that Americans were going to massacre everybody if they made it to mainland Japan.

>lover of cheap and untrue sensationalism
>paper proceeds to print cheap and untrue sensationalism

so this... is the power... of racial science... whoa...

Can someone do a "Scholarly Articles" vs "Infographs" edit?

Actually it was Reagan's repeal of the fairness doctrine and the selling out of the media to sensationalism in the 80's that created the modern media scene.

It used to be illegal to misinform the public.

>[MAN WHO LIKES THING I LIKE] vs. [MAN WHO LIKES THING I DON'T LIKE]
some things never change

was this made by morning leader by any chance?

>the virgin Jap
>the Chadnese

So everything bad about media today is Reagan's fault?

be gone

...

Underrated

First thing I thought of too.

kek

Not everything but that was when it started going down hill. Like most things in America.

Economic liberalization and deregulation are one of the main causes why modern mainstream media is shit.

>sending an enemy's skull to your girlfriend
I bet she opened like a rose.

>he don't want to liberate cuba from the evil Spaniards

Will someone get this hothead outta here?

...

...

>he thinks reading broadsheet papers provides him with an adequate knowledge of the world

kek

Bookend dubs of truth.

>chompsky

Pretty good, except there would've already exist a proto-marxist left. Marx and Engels would've started to make a splash a few years after this newspaper got started. So even then, there would've been a position left of "the typical reader of the Morning Leader".

Sure, the blame is on the shitty left-right dichotomic tradition, but we can avoid this by not stepping around the dichotomy.

We can avoid this BY stepping around the terms, I meant.

Fuck off Chomsky Honk.