The thing is when people are distrustful of the media, I can't blame them, and I can't really defend the press as it currently exists.

This is a problem, because while the Nazi concept of "lugenpresse" IS bullshit, it's... difficult to defend the press when they DO actually lie.

And the concept of "political correctness" AS RIGHT WINGERS UNDERSTAND IT is bullshit, but there ARE true and important things that the press basically never discusses because it would cause too much offence.

Like... you can't bring up failures of capitalism. Ever.

Right wingers want to tear apart things like The Guardian, The New York Times, The Washington Post and the BBC because, very occasionally, they will offer some lukewarm, milquetoast criticisms of right-wing idols and ideas.

They want a media that only ever praises them.

The thing is, I also don't have any love for those organisations either? Literally the only reason I defend them is because the only current alternative is a world in which there is no press but the right-wing press, mostly owned by Murdoch.

This is a weird tangent, but stay with me:

Crusader Kings II has a religious mechanic called "Moral Authority." This basically measures how much respect members of a religion have for their ecclesiastic hierarchy. It's important to keep it high, otherwise heresies break out.

A religion with very low Moral Authority will generally incite rulers who already have personal reasons to want to buck church orthodoxy to embrace heresies that just coincidentally happen to let them do the things they want to do (*cough* marry their own sister *cough*)

Low Moral Authority is inflicted by figures in the religious hierarchy (say, the Pope) who fail to live up to the moral guidelines of the religion they preach, losing Holy Wars (or failing to defend against them) and a religion not controlling sites sacred to it.

And a lot of things that cynical, pragmatic rulers want to do by embracing heresies are undeniably harmful.

But low Moral Authority basically represents the church lacking the credibility to meaningfully say "don't do that, it's evil," even if it really is evil.

The press has basically lost its Moral Authority. Because it will not reliably defend truth, because all reporting is perceived as having a strong agenda, there is no longer enough communal trust to prevent schisms in what is perceived as true.

This means that even when the press does report the truth, not enough people trust it. When sections of the press lie, other sections do not command enough of a reputation for honesty to condemn them without being seen as hypocritical.

Despite having their own reporters racially targetted and illegitimately arrested in violation of both national and international law in broad daylight, news agencies still refuse to condemn the police. They publish op-eds endorsing the use of military force against civilians.

Trans people do not trust any major news organisation to give them fair treatment. Almost no other member of the LGBTQ+ community does either. Ditto disabled folk. I will not speak for BIPOC as a whole but the general impression I have gotten from my BIPOC friends is similar.

Even newspapers regularly derided as "far-left rags" will rarely dare to touch on the irrationality of nationalism or the historic crimes of western societies. The Guardian is regularly called "communist" despite breathlessly advocating for reforms to keep capitalism afloat.