“Not Funny Anymore”
There’s an old joke, “How can you tell when an addict is lying? His lips are moving.” Not terribly funny. Of course, now the word “addict” has been replaced with “politician.” It’s plausible in the current climate of the United States, but also, not funny.
What is challenging in today’s world is knowing whom to believe. Fox has become the leading traditional broadcast medium where people “get” their news. [Note: I can’t bring myself to refer to that airway as a news network.] Access to the news portals has changed dramatically with the advent of social media. The majority of people seeking out news of the day get their info by scrolling their phone, iPad, or computer. These usually brief posts rarely have accountability.
I get the New York Times digitally and, I confess, I’m guilty of scrolling, reading headlines, and noting the posted estimated time to read the whole article in its entirety. At least most of the articles have reporters’ bylines attached, which adds some legitimacy to the work.
To be honest, if you’re still reading up until this point, an element of doubt should be creeping into your brain, i.e. am I being honest? Since January the information highways I’ve followed with any regularity weren’t news feeds at all. YouTube is the best place to hear Jimmy Kimmel’s monologues which are predominately political now. I record Seth Meyer’s A Closer Look, his commercial free fifteen-minute take on Trump and/or his cabinets’ actions from the day before. Every Monday, Jon Stewart homes in with razor-sharp wit as he tries to balance humor and anger at the absurdities we’re witnessing.
I rarely have the opportunity to debate MAGA people. When I bring up a political issue, I get, in response, one of the weakest arguments that supposedly passes as justification – “It’s the same on both sides.” What does that mean? What are the sides? Are the tech billionaires who basically have no obligations to pay their share of taxes or to monitor either true or blatantly false statements, giving muckraking legitimacy in hopes of increasing their algorithms? Not only are there no guard rails on various social platforms, but these sites can also accelerate the spread of misinformation.
Are our troops going to be deployed to the Middle East or reassigned to American cities under exaggerated pretenses? Will armed masked men, impersonating legitimate law enforcement continue to wreak havoc on people who have a right to be here OR at the very least allow for their due process. You might see a clip or two on the “news.” Since these marauding gangs are destroying our democratic way of life, shouldn’t this be a major story?
But here’s the real problem, the reason I’m worried. Under this administration we were recently informed of an attack on Iran, an undeniable act of aggression. Questions I’d like answered: Were there any causalities – military or civilian? And are the statistics truthful? Why wasn’t Congress informed (from what I understand, senators learned of the attack from the photo op the other night with Trump, flanked by the three amigos (or stooges, if you prefer) Vance, Rubio, and good-hair Hegseth. During his remarks, Trump used the adjective “spectacular” in describing the bombing, the same word he used to describe the resolute desk in the Oval Office. We have a President who thrives on manipulating the media and he is spectacular at it.
Truth be damned and none of it’s funny.