Odds and Ends
21 5, 6:37am
Anyone talking about "leftist supporting MSM" (that's MainStream Media for anyone not familiar with the term) in the US is clearly not an unbiased observer himself, but on the far right fringe of the political scale.
Mainstream American media isn't supporting the left at all - in fact there is not ever a mainstream political party in the US that support basic left-wing policies.
Unlike in every other western democracy, where one or several of the major political parties all trace their roots back to the socialist theories of Marx.
Usually these are social democratic parties (or Labour, like they're called in the UK).
The US doesn't have that, as the US is the only western democracy that's never seen a major political party based on the socialist ideology.
Which is also the reason why the US is the only western democracy that doesn't have universal healthcare coverage for all it's citizens - which is a very basic socialist policy.
Not even the Democratic Party in the US (who are falsely viewed as the "left" by many Americans) support universal healthcare coverage as a party. Some individual Democrats do - yes - but it's not a stance the party has officially adopted, still today.
Thus there is no actual representation of real leftist political policies in the US on the national level - only the Democrats (who would be recognized in any other western democracy as a modern right-wing party) and the Republicans (who would be recognized in any other western democracy as a bat-shit crazy far-right party).
So anyone claiming that mainstream US media is supporting "leftist" policies or "misinformation, misdirected context claims, false accusations and blame and outright lies" like you do, don't know what the hell they're talking about.
Instead, all you did there was post the far-right propaganda claims against the mainstream US media - which are of course all just lies.
Mainstream US media is certainly not any of the things you claimed.
They are however often bad at covering news and politics - but that's because they're guided by economic motives, as they're all private companies driven by profit motive.
Which means that selling commercial space is more important then reporting often uncomfortable truths.
Something all other major western democracies have handled by instituting national broadcasting companies that are funded through taxes or direct fees from the viewers, which mean that they don't need to sell add space, run commercials or please the corporate interests.
Instead they can focus on what should be their only real concerns - in-dept factual reporting of news and politics.
Which means that unlike in the US, in the rest of the western democratic world there are actually still arbiters of truth that are generally trusted by the public - even when they tell us uncomfortable truths.
These institutions are of course still being relentlessly attacked from the far-right (and now also Russian state-sponsored influence campaigns that seek to destabilize all western democracies), but so far it's only in the tribalized US where a large minority of far-right wing supporters actually reject truthful but uncomfortable reporting as "fake news" and instead prefer to live in the alternate reality their own right-wing media create for them.
You seem to be one of those people - judging from your comment here and your earlier comments where you among other things spouted the same kind of right-wing propaganda on the topic of man's influence on climate change.