Not gullibility, not exactly. Nor personal agreement.
A deep psychological need and professional incentive for normality, with both sides equal, where we share basic values but disagree about how.
Because if it really is this bad, good people would be biased against it, not neutral and “balanced.”
After Trump tells NBC News he could maybe use a "softer touch" on immigration, we immediately get the "different tone" narrative from CNN.
Brianna Keilar: "A change of tone for the president. Softer touch."
David Chalian: "He acknowledged learning something that this requires a softer touch."
Do the people at CNN really believe Trump has had a change of heart, adopted a sincere new tone, and is adjusting policy accordingly?
I doubt it, but who knows.
I’m not accusing them of believing him or falling for it, I’m accusing them of not caring. They act like truth isn’t part of their job.
In Brazil, during the Bolsonaro years, "Bolsonaro rises tone" and "Bolsonaro lowers tone" were so common titles that I named it a journalism genre on its own: tuner journalism.
Feb 4, 2026 23:38Huh, interesting.
So the phenomenon that a transnational, something resulting from the interaction of 21st century media and far right politicians—or maybe abnormal, serially lying politicians—rather than anything US-specific.
Yep. Clickbait ideology both sides, plus fear to call things by name in order not to alienate the clicks from supporters of the absurd.
