....sarcasm

I'm not defending wapo, I'm criticizing conservatives lol

Then again theyre also the people saying greed is good and theres nothing wrong with making money then criticizing biased media for going after clicks over content

But that's the thing: media like the WaPo dont go after conservatives, and Trump in particular, because of a (primary) economic interest (= generating clicks and ad revenue), they do so out of ideological reasons.

Journalists on average lean significantly to the left, compared to the overall population. And the owners of big news outlets often have specific economic interests which are best served by particular policies and ideologies, so their media pushes this narrative.

For example, the WaPo is owned by Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos. He has a vested interest in unchecked globalization, free trade unhampared by tariffs, and open borders which provide a steady stream of cheap labor. Of course he's super hostile to Trump's ideology, and it shows in WaPo's reporting on everything Trump.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 9 2019 09:27am

You say they do it for ideological reasons then give examples of economic reasons?

Buying a newspaper to push policy that is favorable to your business is economic, not ideological

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Dec 9 2019 09:42am

That's what I was alluding to when I said they dont go after conservatives out of primary economic interest (= strengthening the economic numbers of the news outlet itself). Supporting the economic interests of their owners (even if this editorial course costs them readers) is only a secondary economic interest.

But as I said: the majority of journalists leans liberal anyway, so even if we removed the interests of the owners from the equation, the majority of the media would most likely still lean left.

Whether its a primary or secondary interest is inconsequential to the argument, as is the personal opinions of the journalists.

You said conservatives were criticizing the media for going for clicks over content, and that this stands in contrast to their "greed is good" mentality.

I pointed out that the editorial stance found in media like the WaPo is not designed to maximize their clicks or to be as in sync with public opinion as possible. They are not going for clicks over content.
Instead, their editorial stance is (at least on many subjects) designed to serve the interests of their owners, or to reflect the liberal-leaning ideology of their editor and senior writers.

It still runs contradictory to the "greed is good" narrative even if its originating from the owners other companies interest

Fair enough, although such a "vulgar capitalism" is kinda outdated. I wont deny that forces pushing for this idea of capitalism are still influential within the GOP, but imho it would be unfair to identify the entire party with the libertarian "Koch brothers agenda".
For example, take a look at the common good capitalism proposed by Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley that IceMage posted 2 weeks ago:
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=82056321&f=119