Texas newspapers going one sided? (Houston, Dallas: co-ops, homeless, farmers)

[Joey7]

I see on twitter post from the texas Tribune the texas observer texas monthly and the Houston chronicle are all pro "liberal" and against anything Trump or conservative. Anyone notice this trend...?

The socialist are in Texas and are disguised as liberals. But there is nothing liberal about them.

Will Texas turn blue and end up like SF or LA? Ya know, with all the drug addicted homeless? Because that's what socialist do well, break working systems.

Seems like Texans have fallen for the socialist lie that being "popular and cool" beats actual good ideas that will benefit all.

Just an observation.

[Trainwreck20]

The papers/publications are not 'going blue', they have always been there, more or less. And being 'blue' does not necessarily equate to 'socialist', the same way being 'red' does not make you a racist - way over simplification, but simple people need simple analogies. Never mind that we have always had a socialistic aspect to our country; that doesn't make it a 'socialist' country in the political sense.

And while the Texas monthly definitely leans liberal, it actually does do some excellent reporting covering more than one side. So while it may 'conclude' with a liberal position, it does include different angles and different perspectives. They tend to hire excellent writers. Often, they don't have a firm conclusion, but the fact that they are open to talking about it makes them liberal, I suppose.

[JJG]

Originally Posted by Joey7

I see on twitter post from the texas Tribune the texas observer texas monthly and the Houston chronicle are all pro "liberal" and against anything Trump or conservative. Anyone notice this trend...?

The socialist are in Texas and are disguised as liberals. But there is nothing liberal about them.

Will Texas turn blue and end up like SF or LA? Ya know, with all the drug addicted homeless? Because that's what socialist do well, break working systems.

Seems like Texans have fallen for the socialist lie that being "popular and cool" beats actual good ideas that will benefit all.

Just an observation.

Good lord, the political bias and stereotyping in this post is enough to make me want to vomit.

Is this really necessary...?

[supfromthesite]

Originally Posted by Trainwreck20

=Never mind that we have always had a socialistic aspect to our country; that doesn't make it a 'socialist' country in the political sense.

Since the early 20th century Progressive Era, you mean.

[supfromthesite]

And yes, the media has had a progressive slant for decades. America is not the country our founders and ancestors wanted it to be. It has been sold out.

[Dallaz]

I’ve noticed it. The same thing has happened to The Dallas Morning News. They recently had to lay-off their employees. Maybe it was because their subscriptions started to drop, due to their new liberal stance. Luckly, I don’t rely on one source, I actually watch liberal and conservative news. I find it very interesting to see what people are for and against.

[Trainwreck20]

Originally Posted by supfromthesite

Since the early 20th century Progressive Era, you mean.

I was doing some genealogy work recently and looking at the government co-ops in the mid-1800s for farmers in the north. Education at that time was also 'socialist'. From the first day someone paid a tax, we experience 'socialism' in the economic (not governmental) sense. From a governmental perspective, we are not socialist, as the government does not own the means of production.

But, in any case, most of the papers have been 'liberal' since at least, oh, 1774 or so.

[Trainwreck20]

Originally Posted by Dallaz

[...] They recently had to lay-off their employees. Maybe it was because their subscriptions started to drop, due to their new liberal stance. [...]

Almost every paper in the country is 'contracting', it has more to do with internet than content. And there are only a fraction of the newspapers that there used to be - i.e. the Houston Post and the Houston Chronicle use to have different angles, but the market would not support two papers. Same for San Antonio.

[Kthnry]

Why are there so few media outlets representing conservative views? Who is suppressing their voices? If conservatism has "good ideas that will benefit all," why are they having so much trouble getting the word out? When I watch Fox News, all I hear is complaints about liberals -- never any constructive suggestions.

Related question: Who exactly is responsible for setting the agenda of the liberal news media (including the international press)? I guess there's a central cabal, perhaps headed by George Soros, that meets at 3am in NYC and determines what the day's news coverage will be for all newspapers and TV stations around the world. That must require a lot of coordination. Pretty impressive.

[supfromthesite]

Just look at who owns them