Lootifer wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Lootifer wrote:I was referring to the demagogy as mentioned in that review of his life Sym linked, and the evidence of this demagogy (sorry for thrashing this word, but it's a good one i've only just learned, but felt the need for an equivilent for a long time) in his most well known piece. And how much alternate world views do the PS/NS's of this world genuinely listen too?
I don't know what Phatscotty or Night Strike read or listen to.
That being said, these kinds of guys are in it for the money. Rush Limbaugh is trying to make money. Keith Olbermann is trying to make money. Once people realize that, they understand those guys' motivations and it's easier to care only about the facts behind the message rather than the message itself.
So that makes it ok for the messaging to [sometimes] be batshit insane and further develop this demagogy?
I personally don't like what i've learned about him because of his messages, if he was truely a good investigative journalist worthy of an RIP thread then he should have been politically neutral. But he wasn't so he was a dick.
Demagougery only occurs if there are people to make the speaker a demagogue.
He was a good journalist. Just because you don't agree with his message or his tone, does not change that.