When you’re accused of “bothsidesism”

Criticizing the media is considered a right wing talking point. But if we want to actually make progress with our most pressing problems, we all need to see what’s happening.

In my critique of the media, I’ve been criticized for being a “both sides” person. I’ve been called “amoral” and “nihilistic.”

“Both sides” means I’m accused of equating blatant lies and mistruths with well-established or well-known facts. Or that I’ve assumed no underlying, objective reality to be had.

To put it one more way, it means the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans, and vice versa; both parties are guilty of the same things. And this extends to whichever way we divvy up society — liberal and conservative, coastal and midwestern, socialist and capitalist, etc. We’re not supposed to equate these groups, and if we do, we’ve committed the both sides heresy.

I should expect such rebukes. Anything other than agreeing with a particular side in an argument (even to point out that the media generally benefits from our opposition, so is incentivized to aggravate our divisions), tends to undermine a person’s position. Or, they feel that it does. Then they become oppositional — with me.