The press and pundits are eager to tell Americans what to think if it benefits Republicans but are strangely AWOL on stuff like Hatch Act violations by Trump's staff and start crying "cancel culture" if you call them out on it.

Most both sides stuff is the media attempting to frame a subject in a way that is at least not harmful to the GOP or their white supremacist terror squads, even when they're to blame, which is how "militias" became normalized and why so many headlines are in the passive voice.

A contagious Trump refusing a virtual debate becomes a "contentious back-and-forth between campaigns," for example, purposefully stripping out information and leaving readers to project their own interpretations.

The same with police shootings where people are just mysteriously shot without any assignment of blame or responsibility, or anonymized descriptions of "violence" at protests that imply protestors were responsible despite the plethora of videos showing police brutality.

It's why media coverage goes from fawning or asleep at the wheel under a Republican administration to harshly critical and judgmental under a Democratic one.

You get the idea. It's not subtle.

Grifters like Greenwald and Taibbi are just more blatant about it than most. They'll have nothing to say about BLM or even be openly contemptuous of protestors but rush to defend QAnon from "censorship."

It's almost like the corporate and white male dominated media have some kind of bias, no?

Even the "progressive" pundits have odd ideas about what Democrats should focus on that usually boil down to, "Try harder to appeal to white guys like me."