When Cultural and Mainstream Media Wars Intersect

A significant tenet of woke culture is to sensationalise the victim mentality. It is either you are a victim (preferably on multiple accounts, so you can prove how various oppressions you suffer intersect), OR you are an apologist for the victimisation of others (especially if you were born a caucasian male – woke culture cast caucasian men as some arbitrary villain in their stories; not even based on things like colonialism, but really just based on their existence).
Well, many people in the mainstream media not only knew about this culture but fully immersed themselves in it; in fact, a lot of mainstream media companies are based on embracing woke ideology. Well, recently, there has been an interesting shift in the intersection of cultural and mainstream media wars where Jot Reid got fired from MSNBC. This should have been a conversation on how mainstream media is losing viewership because there is a greater propensity to truth, instead, it has been a discussion on race – which is precisely what we ought to address today.
THE PROBLEM BEGINS WITH MSNBC; THEY BROUGHT VIEWERS JOY REID
And now onto our main discussion on the intersection of cultural and mainstream media wars, and (to begin with) you would have noticed that the so-called mainstream media often has left or liberal inclinations. First, this is in part because the mainstream media has been allocated the role of being the fourth arm of the state, when there is Democratic leadership, like with the Biden-Harris administration. And this often includes propagating false perceptions about the left, aimed at improving the perception of the Democrat establishment.
Historically, we’ve come to learn that mainstream media companies like MSNBC tend to pursue their role as the fourth arm of the state EVEN through the deliberate manipulation of information with the ultimate intention to present a lie as fact. We saw this when MSNBC took one part of a video where Joe Rogan was talking about Kamala Harris, and on another part of a video, where he was talking about Tulsi Gabbard. MSNBC combined those videos together to make it look like everything said was about Kamala and that Joe Rogan was endorsing Harris. Of course this was completely false. Furthermore, it was another violation of the FEC law by failing to report their propaganda as a contribution to Kamala Harris’ campaign.
Secondly, the left or liberal inclinations of the mainstream media are also in part a function of agenda setting. In agenda setting, agencies and journalists must know a lot about various issues in order to comment on them, however, this isn’t often the case, and so their opinions get presented as fact – which easily passes, especially if they are measured by how liberally inclined they are. In addition, their sources often tend to be influenced by a predetermined narrative. Say for example, press releases from organisations such Greenpeace and various governments. These are usually written by people within the organisation who are part of the public relations sphere. Their main aim is to convey favourable information about their employer and the journalist (now unfortunately) receives this as is given.
Therefore, the mass media is intentionally telling their audience what to think about through the tool of agenda setting. Of course, while the media isn’t sanctioned to force anyone to believe in something or to have a certain opinion on a subject, it does make an influencing impression of which face of the coin it thinks is important. It also makes a pre-notion, or first impression, about the subject in the minds of the audience and that off course changes the course of people’s thinking to a larger extent. So, to a significant degree, yes, the media is controlling some of the decisions made by people. The media clearly tells people that if your thinking is inclined in a particular direction, you are not “right”, and that you must rethink to incline your perceptions the way that they tell you to. MSNBC and figures like Rachal Maddow and Joy Reid are the epitome of this. Just listen to this excerpt from MSNBC.
Now, as a viewer, you might correctly state that this is what every media organisation does, and you would not be wrong. All media organisations and houses have an agenda. HOWEVER, what makes agenda setting in the mainstream media especially dangerous, is that it is not based on an objective commitment to propagating truth, rather it is bought and paid for by people who finance the mainstream media. For instance, how many mainstream media anchors, including Joy Reid, have you heard speak about the ills of the COVID plandemic, the harms of the vaccines, the detriments of lockdowns and more? Well, it is not necessarily because they are impervious to these things, rather, mainstream media is often financed by pharmaceutical companies. Which means that when they set an agenda, it is inclined to the best interest of the parties that finance them.
I say this to say that MSNBC brough and curated the continued broadcasting of the ReidOut show with Joy Reid. Her being fired might point to a shift in narrative in the station, especially in the wake of anti-DEI measures from the second Trump administration, BUT not necessarily so, especially with people like Rachael Maddow and ‘The View’ still going on air. Rather, what happened is that Joy Reid’s viewership and ratings plummeted significantly. And in a world where viewership or ratings (as opposed to a propagation of truth) is used to measure your value, Joy Reid was unfortunately spit out by the very system that gave her a platform.
Now, I do not say this because I’m particularly happy about Joy Reid’s misfortunes – not all; I do not agree with a lot of what she stands for and says, but I do not intend to make a mockery of her misfortunes. Rather, this portion of our discussion is to highlight a crucial truth, which is that the author of lies and deception will use people – even give you a big platform, but (ultimately) the devil hates men – he is not merciful and gracious, and will not miss out on an opportunity to not only use them but make a mockery of them as well.
WHY DID JOY REID LOSE VIEWERSHIP? 
So, let’s then address why Joy Reid lost viewership, and how this is a part of the intersection of cultural and mainstream media wars. Well, the first reason is that Joy Reid was essentially sanctioned to be openly racist on air. And this is not hyperbole: Joy Reid would spew remarks that demonise caucasian people, and even just their existence in America – it really was wild, to put it mildly. And I say this with the concession that people of colour cannot be institutionally racist because black people do not own institutions that curated colonialism and other manner of racially charged institutionalised oppression. Rather, I say this in light of racism on the account of disrespect and dehumanisation; that was essentially the synopsis of Joy Reid’s discussions. Here’s an example.
JOY REID IS PART OF A LINE OF FIGURES WHO CAPITALISED ON RACISM
Why is this important to highlight? Because Joy Reid has been part of a line of black socio-political and media figures who capitalised on race, thus fostering a division in America, while pretending to contend for the rights of people of colour. And yet, the recent violent inclinations in America’s social (and political) fabric, including the assassination attempts on Donald Trump, are indicative of a broader issue of division in the American socio-political fabric. And the primary reason is that Democrats, and their liberal media personalities, have intentionally cultivated division in America. And their modus operandi is that they capitalise on divisive issues and essentialism. We have spoken about how we see this manifest in the Harris-Walz campaign, and in how the Obama administration actually contributed significantly to this issue.
For instance, in Barack Obama’s campaign for president, the dominant narrative associated with him was actually not that of hope, but rather that of race because he would be the first black president. This potential political milestone in American history drove Obama’s candidacy EVEN beyond controversial issues that genuinely deserved attention, such as whether he was even born in America. But, because race was such a dominant narrative, to point out these underlying issues or voice out disagreement with him as a candidate or his policies was frequently tainted by the assumption of racism – despite the fact that he, himself, barely grew up with or even lived among African Americans. But, during that time of his candidacy (for both terms) people were thus not required to vote based on critical thinking but on skin colour and identity politics; in fact, during that time, it was also almost treacherous for black people not to support Barack Obama. But, thankfully, many African Americans have woken up to this fact.
JOY REID AND THE PROBLEMATISATION OF “WHITE CHRISTIANS”
Joy Reid also has a problem with the prevalence of Christians in certain states, because she regards their proliferation as an entitlement disguides with Scripture. This was topical when she was complaining on live television because there are too many white Christians in Iowa. Meanwhile, causation people make up almost 90% of the demographic in Iowa. I mean is it a problem that there are many Mexican Catholics in Southern California as well, or is the largemess in number a problem only when the Christians happen to be caucasian?
What this exposes is that a part of liberal culture is to hate Christians, we all know it at this point. All that Joy Reid did in this instance is to use race as a precondition for her problematisation of Christians in Iowa. In fact, the FBI has made this VERY apparent when it went after Christians on the guise that they were apparently “extremists”; and you remember this from the exchange then FBI Director Christopher Wray had with Senator Josh Hawley.
Well, interestingly, Joy Reid (after the news of her being fired) appeared on a programme sobbing and said, her show had value…whether it was the Black Lives Matter issues… understanding 1619 as the real founding of America…Gaza, and the American people having a right to object to little babies being bombed; she said those things are of God…and she is proud of her show.
Now, I will not remark on Joy Reid being a Christian, however, I will state that it is a dangerous thing to speak against the tenets and doctrines of God’s Word, and even ridicule fellow Christians and say that your work is off God. There is a categorical imperative motor allo the Book of the Law to depart from your mouth, and to meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to ALL that is written in it, as we learn in Joshua 1:8.
IS JOY REID BEING FIRED A LOSS FOR DIVERSITY AT MSNBC?
This then brings me to another consideration in light of the loss of viewership endured by Joy Reid, and its feature in the intersection of culture and mainstream media wars; and here, we have to ask the question: is Joy Reid being fired a loss for diversity, equity and inclusion at MSNBC? The answer is yes, but that is not something to lament because DEI policies are inherently bad anyways. DEI policies are what you find at the extreme end of the affirmative action spectrum. They focus a great deal on the optics of inclusion and less on the qualification of individuals, and what practical value they contribute to the overall work.
However, because woke culture is hinged on a victim mentality, word on the liberal street is that it is a sorrowful loss that Joy Reid was fired, PARTICULARLY because she is a black woman.
There is no entitlement to success or opportunities based on pigment. The only reason that this mentality is supported is because people like Rachel Maddow and Joy Reid have embraced the apologist tenet of woke culture, that assumes an inherent oppression and victimisation of people of colour and the need to use DEI policies to somehow correct that. This is why this intersection between culture wars and the media is so detrimental: it makes having people who propagate truth less of a priority, while giving platform to people purely because they look a certain way, claim to be a victim of some oppression, and because they capitalise on divisive essentialisms like race.
Therefore, Joy Reid’s loss of viewership should be seen as an indictment on woke culture in the media, and really in society at large. Americans have been rejecting moral decadence since they voted to put president Trump back in the white house.
JOY REID’S EXTREME DEFENCE OF INAPPROPRIATE MATERIAL FOR CHILDREN
But, in addition to race, Joy Reid pandered towards the defence of so-called LGBT friendly books for children in school. It’s difficult to say that this is based on genuity, because she was once at the centre of potentially being cancelled for allegedly homophobic remarks, and so, people in those positions are often pressured by liberal views and conformity to bend the knee and make themselves out to be advocates of things like the LGBT agenda.
However, in this ase, Joy Reid opted to defend a book detailed obscene material, and rape for to be part of books that are given to children in schools.
Parents certainly have a right o choose what to allow for their children, however, this is generally understood to be in the confines of what is a pre-existing understanding of what is good for the child. This is why the Scripture says for parents to teach a child the way that he should go (meaning there is a defined way that the child should go). This is also why it is a criminal offence for a parent to choose to allow a child to drink, or to choose to allow a toddler to stay alone in a house.
THE IRONY OF DECEPTION IS THAT THE PERSON DECEIVED DOES NOT KNOW THEY ARE
But, then again, one of the biggest problems with deception is that the person being deceived often does not know that they are. I say this because in truth, when you look at what Joy Reid says, she does not come across as a person who has considered the other side of the story; in fact, she appears as a victim to narrative that she also spews; you see this with her assumptions of what Trump seeks to accomplish, or even her perceptions of insecurity around Trump supports.
I would argue that the beginning of the end of multiculturalism was when democrats wanted to replace caucasian people like Joe Biden said. I would say that autocracy was when Democrats were conditionalising who gets to speak freely, while prosecuting those who opposed them. I would say, liberal media figures like her going out of their way to defend Kamala HArris and the democrat establishment is what it means to say that autocracies make people do things.