Did TYT Sell Out?

[Bno]

Objectively, yes. If you receive money from the corporations you're supposed to be fighting against, you are not a progressive news channel. 

Robbie Jaeger has done great work researching all the behind the scenes dealings TYT has done with corporations that also fund establishment Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer.

 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno

[Preety_India]

Which corporations is TYT supposed to be fighting against? 

 

I don't think they are against democrats. 

I didn't get your point. Can you elaborate 

[Forestluv]

TYT is on the progressive side - they are part of the team. They are not perfect, yet they are nowhere near the corruption of corporate mainstream media. Holding fellow progressives accountable in a supportive manner is fine. Yet, stigmatizing/demonizing our fellow progressives as corrupt corporatists is a form of self cannibalism and not a good idea, imo. There are very very few perfectly pure progressives, if any. 

 

[Bno]

13 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Which corporations is TYT supposed to be fighting against? 

 

I don't think they are against democrats. 

I didn't get your point. Can you elaborate 

TYT claims to be fighting against corporate influence in American politics, a key feature that defines progressivism. Yet they are receiving money from the very same corporations that fund politicians that implement policies that benefit corporations over the people.

https://medium.com/@RobletoFire/the-ideological-failure-of-the-young-turks-90c15ddde408

I recommend watching the video which gives a summary of the research on their shadiness. 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno

[Bno]

18 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

TYT is on the progressive side - they are part of the team. They are not perfect, yet they are nowhere near the corruption of corporate mainstream media. Holding fellow progressives accountable in a supportive manner is fine. Yet, stigmatizing/demonizing our fellow progressives as corrupt corporatists is a form of self cannibalism and not a good idea, imo. There are very very few perfectly pure progressives, if any. 

 

Given some of their talking points and their corporate influence, they are mainstream media-lite.

I'm not demonizing them. I'm just saying they are not what they claim to be. There are also several progressive journalists and commentators that are more politically conscious and objective than TYT.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno

[Forestluv]

35 minutes ago, Bno said:

There are also several progressive journalists and commentators that are more politically conscious and objective than TYT.

I noticed you listed Jimmy Dore as one of those higher politically-conscious progressives, which I would disagree with.

Imo, you are going over-board on criticizing TYT. They are clearly on the progressive side. In my POV, progressives need to take care with how we criticize our fellow progressives. You don't seem to be criticizing TYT as fellow progressives, imo.  

35 minutes ago, Bno said:

Given some of their talking points and their corporate influence, they are mainstream media-lite.

That's like saying calculus is algebra-lite. 

[Preety_India]

44 minutes ago, Bno said:

TYT claims to be fighting against corporate influence in American politics, a key feature that defines progressivism. Yet they are receiving money from the very same corporations that fund politicians that implement policies that benefit corporations over the people.

https://medium.com/@RobletoFire/the-ideological-failure-of-the-young-turks-90c15ddde408

I recommend watching the video which gives a summary of the research on their shadiness. 

Ok I got the point. I have been watching the TYT since a long time now. But I had no idea who was actually funding them. 

I thought maybe the Al-jazeera was funding. I always thought that they were a bit backhanded and sneaky about who funds them 

I don't like how they try to pit one racial community against another and constantly feed on identity politics. 

But now it becomes clear. 

They are more like propagandists. 

Their agenda is a bit manipulative in my opinion. 

It seems like they work as a secondary agency for someone at the top. No idea who really supports them. 

It's best not to give into media propaganda. 

They too have some internal agenda. 

Nobody from a media group can be trusted. 

Like Trump says.... Fake news. 

 

I always knew they were a sellout 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Preety_India

[Bno]

7 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

I noticed you listed Jimmy Dore as one of those higher politically-conscious progressives, which I would disagree with.

Imo, you are going over-board on criticizing TYT. They are clearly on the progressive side. In my POV, progressives need to take care with how we criticize our fellow progressives. You don't seem to be criticizing TYT as fellow progressives, imo.  

Thats just my view, you are free to disagree. 

Just to justify my views on Jimmy, I know Jimmy Dore may come off as low consciousness on the surface to people who follow self-actualization because of his anger in his videos. Howerve, he is willing to admit when he's wrong and he has. His show isn't scripted, he speaks from the heart after reading up on the issues. He also speaks from compassion and empathy of the people suffering in this country and whose voices aren't heard. He speaks to people on the ground unbiasedly, whether they're left of right. He also is truly independent. As the time has gone on I have also seen him grow more intelligent about politics.

As TYT, Sam Sedar, and D Pakman's subscribers went down during the Russiagate fiasco, Jimmy's went up because he was exposing the mainstream media fallacies as well as speaking up about issues that were being ignored, like how people were still not having clean water in Flint, how corporate Dems like Nancy Pelosi were voting for legislatures and cabinet picks that boosted Trump and the military industrial complex, how the DNC continued to rig primaries in 2018 against progressive candidates like Tim Canova, how we're attempting to install coups and sanctions and bombing other countries which corporate Democrats voted for it, etc. 

To be a progressive, you have to fight for the issues that help the people that are being oppressed. If TYT is making dealings with the very same people that are directly causing the oppression, me and other progressives are going to have to criticize them to get them back on the right path.

[Preety_India]

2 minutes ago, Bno said:

To be a progressive, you have to fight for the issues that help the people that are being oppressed. If TYT is making dealings with the very same people that are directly causing the oppression, me and other progressives are going to have to criticize them to get them back on the right path.

Do you think there is any media channel out there that is truly not making dealings with corporations. 

I think independent media is a fallacy

 

 

[Bno]

33 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Ok I got the point. I have been watching the TYT since a long time now. But I had no idea who was actually funding them. 

I thought maybe the Al-jazeera was funding. I always thought that they were a bit backhanded and sneaky about who funds them 

I don't like how they try to pit one racial community against another and constantly feed on identity politics. 

But now it becomes clear. 

They are more like propagandists. 

Their agenda is a bit manipulative in my opinion. 

It seems like they work as a secondary agency for someone at the top. No idea who really supports them. 

It's best not to give into media propaganda. 

They too have some internal agenda. 

Nobody from a media group can be trusted. 

Like Trump says.... Fake news. 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, this is all true.

[Bno]

12 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Do you think there is any media channel out there that is truly not making dealings with corporations. 

I think independent media is a fallacy

 

 

Yes, people who are truly independent and grassroots are MCSC Network, The Jimmy Dore Show, Secular Talk, Primo Nutmeg, Graham Elwood, Michael Tracy, The Grayzone, Ron Placone, Kim Iversen, Jamarl Thomas, Tim Black, and many other more esoteric channels on YouTube. 

Some people that work for companies but are pretty objective and who do not themselves receive money from shady corporations are Krystal Ball and Sagaar of The Hill's Rising, Katy Halper and Matt Taibi of The Rollingstone's Useful Idiots, and Lee Camp of RT's Redacted Tonight.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, Bno said:

Yes, people who are truly independent and grassroots are MCSC Network, The Jimmy Dore Show, Secular Talk, Primo Nutmeg, Graham Elwood, Michael Tracy, The Grayzone, Ron Placone, Kim Iversen, Jamarl Thomas, Tim Black, and many other more esoteric channels on YouTube. 

Some people that work for corporate influenced companies but are pretty objective without any of the propagandization and shadiness seen in TYT are Krystal Ball and Sagaar of The Hill's Rising, Katy Halper and Matt Taibi of The Rollingstone's Useful Idiots, and Lee Camp of RT's Redacted Tonight.

The TYT does a lot of sensationalism that's why I haven't heard much about all of these. 

Sensationalist advertising always attracts the maximum crowd. 

 

[Forestluv]

23 minutes ago, Bno said:

Just to justify my views on Jimmy, I know Jimmy Dore may come off as low consciousness on the surface to people who follow self-actualization because of his anger in his videos.

That's not why I don't consider him high conscious. I would say Dore is part of the progressive team, yet I wouldn't consider him a particularly high conscious progressive. Yet that's fine, he is still part of the family. 

23 minutes ago, Bno said:

As TYT, Sam Sedar, and D Pakman's subscribers went down during the Russiagate fiasco,

I disagree with your interpretation of "Russiagate". In particular, all US intelligence agencies, national security adivisors and diplomats agree that Russian interfered in the 2016 election, are continuing to interfere and the interference is a serious threat to US democracy. I think TYT and Sam Seder took on the issue seriously. 

23 minutes ago, Bno said:

like how people were still not having clean water in Flint, how corporate Dems like Nancy Pelosi were voting for legislatures and cabinet picks that boosted Trump and the military industrial complex, how the DNC continued to rig primaries in 2018 against progressive candidates like Tim Canova, how we're attempting to install coups and sanctions and bombing other countries which corporate Democrats voted for it, etc. 

TYT, majority report et. al. did take on these issues. They just didn't cover them to the extent you want and how you want. Not every progressive media outlet will cover the exact same issues to the same extent. You don't think coverage of Russian interference is an important issue. That's fine, you prefer other issues. I think Russia interference is an important issue and I like to see some coverage on it. 

23 minutes ago, Bno said:

To be a progressive, you have to fight for the issues that help the people that are being oppressed. 

You are defining "progressive" through your personal filter and extrapolating that to others. An aspect of being progressive is fighting for those that are oppressed. Yet being progressive is more than that and has nuances. For example, climate change and environmental conservation are progressive issues. As well, there are variations on how we protect those who are oppressed. For example, I see Russian interference into our elections is oppressive. Fighting against Russian interference is fighting against oppression of people. 

Imo, you are splitting too many hairs and going overboard. There is a mentality that we progressives are all on the same team, united. We can still hold each other accountable, yet we are on the same team. That is not the vibe I get from you. It seems like you are trying to develop litmus tests and dividing progressives into "real" and "pseudo" progressives. Rather than TYT and Sam Seder being part of our team - they become an "other". This causes too much separation and division, which is harmful to progress, imo. 

By your litmus tests, I probably don't qualify as an official, certified progressive in your eyes - which is fine from your perspective. Yet to me it's kinda silly. 

1 hour ago, Bno said:

I'm not demonizing them.

I don't think you are being critical in a way that is productive for progressive evolution. TYT does a lot of good work. The majority of their work is aligned with progressivism. Yet you seem to be portraying them as pseudo-progressives that are causing more harm than good. Imo, this is not a helpful orientation. 

[Preety_India]

6 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Russian interfered in the 2016 election, are continuing to interfere and the interference is a serious threat to US democracy. I think TYT and Sam Seder took on the issue seriously. 

Where is the legitimacy for the whole Russiagate 

Until anything is proven, everything is he said she said. 

 

[Leo Gura]

What you have to understand is that if you are going to change the system in a big way you are going to have to Aikido the system's energy against itself. And of course as you co-opt the system, it will also co-opt you.

Using money to combat money in politics isn't hypocrisy per se, it's a necessity.

TYT is playing a game of survival, just like everyone else, just like corporations, religions, politicians, you, and me. This means chasing money to some extent.

You shouldn't be too purist about these things because politics and survival are not a purist sport. If you want purity, become a monk and forget all about politics. Politics is pure survival. So it's gonna be dirty.

[Forestluv]

9 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Where is the legitimacy for the whole Russiagate 

I didn't refer to a fantasy creation called "Russiagate". I have no interest in that silliness. I am referring to actual Russian interference. That is the threat to democracy. 

9 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Until anything is proven, everything is he said she said. 

Every US intelligence agency, every US national security advisor and every US diplomat related Russia all agree that there was Russian interference. The highest authorities have investigated, have direct experience and testified under oath. 

To refer to this consensus of the highest qualified experts and authorities in the world as "Russiagate" is absurd. It would be like saying what Stephen Speilberg says about his movies is "Movie-gate". 

[Preety_India]

24 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Every US intelligence agency, every US national security advisor and every US diplomat related Russia all agree that there was Russian interference. The highest authorities have investigated, have direct experience and testified under oath. 

But Edward Snowden has said that the government purposely hides information from the public, that the security and privacy is already compromised which the American government was very wishy washy about. Then how can the US intelligence agency be trusted. 

What if this is another agenda to get Trump impeached fuelled by those who have an interest in it. 

It seems the impeachment controversy is underway in Carolina. I just looked into it. It's fake news again. 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Preety_India

[Bno]

56 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

What you have to understand is that if you are going to change the system in a big way you are going to have to Aikido the system's energy against itself. And of course as you co-opt the system, it will also co-opt you.

Using money to combat money in politics isn't hypocrisy per se, it's a necessity.

TYT is playing a game of survival, just like everyone else, just like corporations, religions, politicians, you, and me. This means chasing money to some extent.

You shouldn't be too purist about these things because politics and survival are not a purist sport. If you want purity, become a monk and forget all about politics. Politics is pure survival. So it's gonna be dirty.

Would you say the same if Bernie Sanders received money from corporations?  

Do you think some of TYT's beliefs may be swayed by the people who are funding them, as we see happens to MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News? 

Do you think a multi-million dollar company like TYT needs donations from Hillary donors to deliver news? They survived for a while before 2016 from just grassroots funding. Others like Secular Talk, Jimmy Dore, MCSC Netowrks, Tim Black, and The Grayzone are doing fine without millions of corporate dollars.

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno

[Forestluv]

23 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

But Edward Snowden has said that the government purposely hides information from the public, that the security and privacy is already compromised which the American government was very wishy washy about. Then how can the US intelligence agency be trusted. 

What if this is another agenda to get Trump impeached fuelled by those who have an interest in it. 

It seems the impeachment controversy is underway in Carolina 

Of course there are incidents in which US intelligence oversteps boundaries and acts inappropriately. Yet in the case of Russian interference, we are not talking about isolated aspect of corrupt intelligence. We are talking about the whole operation: ALL the career servants in US intelligence AND US national security advisers AND US diplomats. There is not a single expert or authority in opposition. Not a single whistle-blower. Further, they all testified under oath under penalty of perjury and imprisonment. To believe that this is a massive consensus in which all the US experts and authorities are lying in a massive conspiracy against the US and their own self interests is beyond absurd. A person would need to create all sorts of bizarre twists and stories to create this absurd reality. The alternative is that they are telling the truth. People like Bill Taylor are at the highest level of integrity and non-partisanship. They are the type of people that dedicate and sacrifice themselves to sovereignty and democracy. They are never in the limelight. They work quietly behind the scenes. They are not owned by corporations. They are not motivated politically. They are not motivated to get reach, advance their own person agenda, get re-elected, to become famous, to gain power etc. They are not politicians and they don't lie about this type of stuff. 

Imaging questioning whether Adyashanti was lying. Thinking that he is trying to manipulate people so he can get rich and famous and become president. It would be an absurd story. 

[Bno]

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

I disagree with your interpretation of "Russiagate". In particular, all US intelligence agencies, national security adivisors and diplomats agree that Russian interfered in the 2016 election, are continuing to interfere and the interference is a serious threat to US democracy. I think TYT and Sam Seder took on the issue seriously. 

Then why don't they take the same issue just as seriously with the DNC rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders? Or when voting machines were proven to be rigged in the 2000 election against Al Gore? Why don't these intelligence agencies push for more secure election policies that aren't funded by corporations whose goals are to monopolize ballot boxes? Is it for the same reasons that they lied to the public about the Iraq War? The Afghanistan War? and why they push for the Patriot Act? Why did they refuse to cooperate with Russia when they offered to have stronger legislature against cyber warfare? 

They have interests in propping up their own agendas and the military industrial complex.

As for TYT and Sedar? Maybe they were duped. Maybe they consciously or unconsciously were influenced by the people who fund them (Hillary think tanks fund TYT; MSNBC funds Sedar).

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

You are defining "progressive" through your personal filter and extrapolating that to others. An aspect of being progressive is fighting for those that are oppressed. Yet being progressive is more than that and has nuances. For example, climate change and environmental conservation are progressive issues. As well, there are variations on how we protect those who are oppressed. For example, I see Russian interference into our elections is oppressive. Fighting against Russian interference is fighting against oppression of people. 

What about the DNC interfering in the 2016 and 2018 primaries, of which there is actual evidence for?

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

Imo, you are splitting too many hairs and going overboard. There is a mentality that we progressives are all on the same team, united. We can still hold each other accountable, yet we are on the same team. That is not the vibe I get from you. It seems like you are trying to develop litmus tests and dividing progressives into "real" and "pseudo" progressives. Rather than TYT and Sam Seder being part of our team - they become an "other". This causes too much separation and division, which is harmful to progress, imo. 

If  someone is giving you information that you discover ultimately goes against your best interest, would you still listen to them? For example, attacking Tulsi Gabbard, a woman who stepped down from her DNC chair position to endorse Bernie Sanders when she realized the primaries were rigged against him, who is also actively to end corporate money in politics and to end regime change wars, is counterproductive. Yet they prop up people like Warren who did not endorse Sanders in 2016 because she was having talks of being Hillary's VP, has think tanks that her daughter is tied to funding things like the working families party to endorse her over Sanders, who said will receive corporate money in the general election, etc. It is them who create division by not being honest or objective. If they do not learn from the criticism me and other give them, then I will stop listening to them.

You can listen to them, I just think it is important for you to know these things about them.

1 hour ago, Serotoninluv said:

By your litmus tests, I probably don't qualify as an official, certified progressive in your eyes - which is fine from your perspective. Yet to me it's kinda silly. 

You aren't in the position of providing news to the public like they are. You also do not have a multi-million dollar show that receives funds from millionaire Hillary donors, the people that TYT themselves claim to be fighting against. 

Edited December 16, 2019 by Bno