I've seen plenty of Krugman to recognize he's part of the political bipolariztion media ecosystem replacing trad news. I used to consume a lot of that group until I realized they are as much a part of the problem as the right wingers.

Both sides are about winning at all costs and dominating others. Politics should be about compromise, give and take. The real fight is against the oligarchs and Trump-Epstein class.

Eh, if you are really interested in the phenomenon of the current media ecosystem, I would point you to the work by Faris, Roberts, and Benkler.

I do agree that wealth concentration is an issue, and that needs to be addressed.

I push back on the idea that it’s political bipolarization, since that implies the same process is occurring on the left and the right.

Do you have some search terms to go with those three names I can use?

Perhaps "bifurcation" is a better word. Not the same process, but both sides seem to be leaning into win at all costs and then dominate the other side. I am involved in my local indivisible and hear this regularly from some of the people.

Certainly the right has been far more effective at the new media landscape. The left talks about it all the time. I find the big voices on the left unappealing as I'm not a super leftie.

Another thing both sides are doing (imo) is primarily talking about all the awful things. Neither is painting a picture for what a better future looks like and how we get there.

Benkler is the faculty co-director of the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University. The 3 of them wrote Network Propaganda, which came out in 2018.

They analyzed news stories, distribution, social media sharing, network effects - effectively the works. Frankly it was everything I thought I knew, and then some, all in one place.

It ends up illuminating the reasons/processes why the right has been effective, and how the center and left differ.

> certainly the right has been far more effective at the new media landscape.

I cannot tell you how genuinely relieved I am that this is acknowledged at all. For decades it was assumed that both sides were the same, that CNN was the equivalent of Fox.

If you don’t understand your opposition, and your opposition sets the terms of the competition, it isn’t reasonable to expect a fair competition.

> The left talks about it all the time. I find the big voices on the left unappealing as I'm not a super leftie.

Given how effective the right was at setting agendas, from Tan suits to outright conspiracy theories, it was inevitable that it was going to be emulated.

That said, there are voices and views that are more centrist that will build in time, especially if they understand how to be more competitive in this arena.

> Another thing both sides are doing (imo) is primarily talking about all the awful things. Neither is painting a picture for what a better future looks like and how we get there.

1) Awful things are more efficient items to share and broadcast, so they get produced and shared more.

2) I would push back on the idea that people aren’t selling a pathway for a better future. They definitely are, hence the ICE detention camps, laws, DOGE and other changes they are pushing through.

This may not be appealing to you, but the visions very much exist, and are being realized as we speak.