Responding to Doug Johnson.

One of the main results of the relentless propaganda to which U.S.-based viewers are subject is the skewing of what is called the ‘Overton window’, that is, the understanding of what counts as ‘left’ and ‘right’ discourse.

This skew is reflected in ‘The Media Bias Chart’.

The idea that Forbes, ABC, CNN, the Washington Post, etc. are ‘neutral’ or even ‘left’ is laughable. From a perspective outside the U.S. media bubble all of these would be regarded as ‘right’, and some of them (especially Forbes) as ‘hard right’. Even though MSNBC relentlessly supports the Democrat party, it too is, from a global perspective, a right wing news outlet.

I think the division in the chart above stems from an almost complete recasting of what it means to be ‘left’ or ‘right’ in U.S. discourse. Most often, I see the difference characterized on social and cultural grounds, for example, on issues such as abortion, the death penalty, the role of religion in the state, gun control, DEI, etc. Generally, though, these are non-issues in the rest of the world’s democracies.

The division between left and right actually reflects a division between socialism (left) and capitalism (right). No news source in the U.S. recognizes capitalism as anything other than normal and inevitable. The U.S. has little to no socialist media, and little to no media advocating for government provision of essential services such as health care and education, much less national control over banking and financial services. A socialist media will typically represent the perspective of labour and worker’s rights, but virtually no media in the U.S. does.

The absence of world news sources from the chart here is a good indication of its bias. Where are the Guardian, Le Monde, Welt, El Pais, or even Canada’s Globe and Mail or Toronto Star? On this chart, they would all be ‘strong left’ though the rest of the world regards them as mainstream or even somewhat right.