December 22, 2025
Todd Gets it Backwards
Timothy Birdnow
Uh, Chuckie, it was the bald-faced lies you told the public that America lost trust in. And the self-styled "experts" trotted out by the lying media, not the loss of trust in experts leading to the collapse in trust in the media. YOU GUYS chose only one side to promote in any given circumstance and called those who disagreed kooks or liars.
Chuck Todd Says People Lost Trust in Media Because they Lost Trust in the Experts
Climate Change is a great example of that. I can give you dozens of names of top guys who would provide balance for the climate crusaders, yet you never,ever interview them. Then you blame a "loss of trust in experts" for the public losing trust in YOU for not providing both sides.
Roy Spencer, William Happer, Judith Curry, Roger Pielke Sr. and Jr., Freeman Dyson, etc. were all absolutely top people in their fields and disagreed with the doomsday cult, but you never bothered to interview them honestly. You smeared them and then said no credible people disputed the alarmist views of guys like Michael Mann or Phil Jones or the like.
What hypocrites you are!
But the Pandmeic really illustrated to Americans how dishonest you in the media can be. We never, ever got a dissenting voice from the CDC and you called anyone, no matter how well informed, liars and fools and called for their deplatforming and even firing for daring to question what has now been proven to be a lie (like the idea the vax stopped the spread of Covid).
From the article:
Again, the media could just have provided balance on most issues but chose to promote only one side - the side the government championed, the side the Left championed. They always had a choice.
And people lost trust in "experts" because they were being used to gaslight and everyone knew it. The loss in faith in institutions once held sacred was a coefficient of their politicization under Obama/Biden and even before, and the media's complicity in this politicization.
Sorry Chuck but your argument has it backwards. It's YOU we have rejected, the lying media who sees themselves as some sort of oracle of Delphi. Delphi no longer exists as a place of prophecy, chief.
Uh, Chuckie, it was the bald-faced lies you told the public that America lost trust in. And the self-styled "experts" trotted out by the lying media, not the loss of trust in experts leading to the collapse in trust in the media. YOU GUYS chose only one side to promote in any given circumstance and called those who disagreed kooks or liars.
Chuck Todd Says People Lost Trust in Media Because they Lost Trust in the Experts
Climate Change is a great example of that. I can give you dozens of names of top guys who would provide balance for the climate crusaders, yet you never,ever interview them. Then you blame a "loss of trust in experts" for the public losing trust in YOU for not providing both sides.
Roy Spencer, William Happer, Judith Curry, Roger Pielke Sr. and Jr., Freeman Dyson, etc. were all absolutely top people in their fields and disagreed with the doomsday cult, but you never bothered to interview them honestly. You smeared them and then said no credible people disputed the alarmist views of guys like Michael Mann or Phil Jones or the like.
What hypocrites you are!
But the Pandmeic really illustrated to Americans how dishonest you in the media can be. We never, ever got a dissenting voice from the CDC and you called anyone, no matter how well informed, liars and fools and called for their deplatforming and even firing for daring to question what has now been proven to be a lie (like the idea the vax stopped the spread of Covid).
From the article:
In the interview, Todd said the erosion of confidence in journalism reflects a larger breakdown in trust across major institutions, not just the press.
"Well, I think the short answer is yes, and I think, look, we haven’t had reliable political leadership,” Todd said when asked about declining trust in the media.
Todd said journalists are often dependent on the credibility of their sources, which can directly affect how the public perceives reporting. He said that reliance becomes a problem when the sources themselves are no longer trusted.
"And I think one of the things I like to remind people is one of the reasons I think trust in media has fallen to so low is remember what the media is,” Todd said.
"It’s a reflection of — I say I’m as good as the sources I have, not necessarily the sources I want at times, to borrow a phrase from the late Donald Rumsfeld, meaning, if you’re getting untrustworthy sources, you may be reporting untrustworthy information right? You get my drift here.”
Todd said that dynamic has contributed to a broader collapse in confidence not just in journalism but in institutions more generally.
"Well, I think the short answer is yes, and I think, look, we haven’t had reliable political leadership,” Todd said when asked about declining trust in the media.
Todd said journalists are often dependent on the credibility of their sources, which can directly affect how the public perceives reporting. He said that reliance becomes a problem when the sources themselves are no longer trusted.
"And I think one of the things I like to remind people is one of the reasons I think trust in media has fallen to so low is remember what the media is,” Todd said.
"It’s a reflection of — I say I’m as good as the sources I have, not necessarily the sources I want at times, to borrow a phrase from the late Donald Rumsfeld, meaning, if you’re getting untrustworthy sources, you may be reporting untrustworthy information right? You get my drift here.”
Todd said that dynamic has contributed to a broader collapse in confidence not just in journalism but in institutions more generally.
Again, the media could just have provided balance on most issues but chose to promote only one side - the side the government championed, the side the Left championed. They always had a choice.
And people lost trust in "experts" because they were being used to gaslight and everyone knew it. The loss in faith in institutions once held sacred was a coefficient of their politicization under Obama/Biden and even before, and the media's complicity in this politicization.
Sorry Chuck but your argument has it backwards. It's YOU we have rejected, the lying media who sees themselves as some sort of oracle of Delphi. Delphi no longer exists as a place of prophecy, chief.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
01:23 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 578 words, total size 4 kb.
1
When the discussion turns to "experts," I'm always reminded of the wisdom of Harry S Truman, who used to say "You can't tell an expert anything, because then he's no longer an expert."
It was true in his time, and it sure hasn't changed in ours.
It was true in his time, and it sure hasn't changed in ours.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at December 23, 2025 02:50 AM (1RU3J)
2
Truer than ever today Dana. Who designates someone an expert anyway? Because he or she has a Ph.D. in a subject? There are lots of other people with the same credentials but they aren't heralded as experts. Experts are so styled by the media or by themselves.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 23, 2025 10:03 AM (PhvYe)
3
BTW Plato did the world a terrible disservice with his notion of the "philosopher king". Later he rejected his own arguments for such a ruler but the damage is done and we still pursue this idea in the form of technocracy, but it's the tired mistake of Plato all along - something that has never worked. Most monarchs in Europe were educated by the very best teachers and scholars and most of them sucked big time. Human nature leads to hubris and a philosopher king is usually going to be the most arrogant of them all. And this leads to adopting terrible, unworkable ideas because the pk thinks the power of his wisdom will overcome everything.
It was why Solomon, despite being extremely sharp, wound up being a rather poor ruler and there was a rebellion as soon as he died.
It was why Solomon, despite being extremely sharp, wound up being a rather poor ruler and there was a rebellion as soon as he died.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at December 23, 2025 10:07 AM (PhvYe)
4
The first U.S. president with a PhD was Woodrow Wilson, and I defy anybody to argue that he was any good -- any American or anybody else. Especially anybody who was involved with diplomacy during WW I.
King Solomon's problem was that he was pussy-whipped. He supposedly was wise, but how can you call a man wise who married all those women?
King Solomon's problem was that he was pussy-whipped. He supposedly was wise, but how can you call a man wise who married all those women?
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at December 24, 2025 01:28 AM (1RU3J)
27kb generated in CPU 0.0568, elapsed 0.2884 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.2668 seconds, 192 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.2668 seconds, 192 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
