Emily Jashinsky

Can I answer why they don't? I think that's actually a really interesting part of this because I – I believe that you could fix trust in media tomorrow. If the New York times and even the good faith people, like there's maybe 10% of journalists can genuinely be neutral and don't have like significant biases in one direction or the other. You can't tell it in their copy.

Can I answer why they don't? I think that's actually a really interesting part of this because I – I believe that you could fix trust in media tomorrow. If the New York times and even the good faith people, like there's maybe 10% of journalists can genuinely be neutral and don't have like significant biases in one direction or the other. You can't tell it in their copy.

Can I answer why they don't? I think that's actually a really interesting part of this because I – I believe that you could fix trust in media tomorrow. If the New York times and even the good faith people, like there's maybe 10% of journalists can genuinely be neutral and don't have like significant biases in one direction or the other. You can't tell it in their copy.

Like there are some people who can do that, but they're very, very rare with the New York times and the Washington post just came out tomorrow and said, Oh, Our reporting, not our editorial side, our reporting leans left. The vast majority of our reporters are liberal.

Like there are some people who can do that, but they're very, very rare with the New York times and the Washington post just came out tomorrow and said, Oh, Our reporting, not our editorial side, our reporting leans left. The vast majority of our reporters are liberal.

Like there are some people who can do that, but they're very, very rare with the New York times and the Washington post just came out tomorrow and said, Oh, Our reporting, not our editorial side, our reporting leans left. The vast majority of our reporters are liberal.

We think, you know, maybe they put one of those signs in this house, we believe X, Y, and Z outside of the Washington Post and New York Times. They would fix trust with their audience like right off the bat. because they do some genuinely decent reporting. Just tell us what you think.

We think, you know, maybe they put one of those signs in this house, we believe X, Y, and Z outside of the Washington Post and New York Times. They would fix trust with their audience like right off the bat. because they do some genuinely decent reporting. Just tell us what you think.

We think, you know, maybe they put one of those signs in this house, we believe X, Y, and Z outside of the Washington Post and New York Times. They would fix trust with their audience like right off the bat. because they do some genuinely decent reporting. Just tell us what you think.

But the reason they can't do that is that they are all in these cultural bubbles where they don't understand that their biases are biases. They think this is just a matter of human rights or decency or civility, but they don't understand that actually those are significant biases in one direction or the other.

But the reason they can't do that is that they are all in these cultural bubbles where they don't understand that their biases are biases. They think this is just a matter of human rights or decency or civility, but they don't understand that actually those are significant biases in one direction or the other.

But the reason they can't do that is that they are all in these cultural bubbles where they don't understand that their biases are biases. They think this is just a matter of human rights or decency or civility, but they don't understand that actually those are significant biases in one direction or the other.

So they're in such a bubble that they're not even able to determine anymore what's a bias and what's like actually just the things that are still controversial and contentious outside of their little bubbles. And what's actually just something that's a point of consensus that we all agree on.

So they're in such a bubble that they're not even able to determine anymore what's a bias and what's like actually just the things that are still controversial and contentious outside of their little bubbles. And what's actually just something that's a point of consensus that we all agree on.

So they're in such a bubble that they're not even able to determine anymore what's a bias and what's like actually just the things that are still controversial and contentious outside of their little bubbles. And what's actually just something that's a point of consensus that we all agree on.

They can't tell one from the other because they're so siloed in what Charles Murray called super zips, New York, Washington, D.C., L.A., where upper middle class educated people disproportionately cluster and are disproportionately powerful. They can't even tell anymore.

They can't tell one from the other because they're so siloed in what Charles Murray called super zips, New York, Washington, D.C., L.A., where upper middle class educated people disproportionately cluster and are disproportionately powerful. They can't even tell anymore.

They can't tell one from the other because they're so siloed in what Charles Murray called super zips, New York, Washington, D.C., L.A., where upper middle class educated people disproportionately cluster and are disproportionately powerful. They can't even tell anymore.

Right.

Right.