CNN’s Dana Bash interviews JD Vance
I have to say that I grew up used to hearing hot air from both sides of the political aisle. As I saw it, everyone knew it. Everyone expected it.
So these days, to listen to JD Vance, for instance, lay something out or take a subject apart is a distinct pleasure.
To listen to Megan Kelly analyze an interview has to be a delight, so much so that we ignore that we’re not above doing the same what amounts to biased reporting of our opponents that they’re doing of us. We’re perpetuating the practice.
Our interviews are as much of a pile-on as theirs are. It’s just that they’re our pile-ons.
Because they’re ours, they’re more likely to sound truthful to us. They reinforce our own beliefs, which is why it feels so good to watch them. And we scarcely notice the adversarialism.
We have a self-serving bias that makes that adversarialism OK – as long as we’re winning, of course.
I find the self-serving bias to be very difficult to see; very challenging to acknowledge; and very difficult to let go of.
But, just as journalism has been through stages so far – mostly to its corruption, but now on the road to its redemption! – so, where we’re at now is also a stage. This is us taking back the castle. We heralds rouse our troops in the process of doing so.
But after we’ve secured the castle again, let’s evolve past this stage.
We’ve moved from the sensationalism of our early patriot/lightworker/truther journalism to intelligently but happily tearing the other side apart. Which is not proving hard to do.
It’s not the full prize, but, in the midst of a war, I choose to accept it. I choose to follow the white-hat leadership – “Trust the Plan” – and refrain from projecting my expectations onto competent leaders when reality is knocking at the door.