On the media:  a diminished presence; taking a knee

As a participant and observer of government and politics my whole adult life I have worked with, fought with, and enjoyed the company of folks who are collectively called journalists.  They work for newspapers, television, and radio.  There are fewer of them now and their role has been changing significantly.

At the beginning of my working life I was employed at the Erie County Legislature.  There were issues with budgets, health care, public works projects, social services and many other things.  The legislators who I worked for were constantly dealing with those issues while at the same time dealing with the media.  “If we give this story to the Buffalo Evening News Doug Turner at the Courier Express will be ticked off.”  And visa versa, pretty much every day.  In retrospect we, legislators and staff, did not appreciate how meaningful that situation actually was because no matter whoever was chosen to receive the first dibs on a story, the story would get covered (and oftentimes, therefore, attacked by the other newspaper.)

The Courier Express passed out of existence forty-three years ago.  The newly named Buffalo News (since it began to publish in the morning) had the field all to themselves and they had a heyday with it.  The paper’s owners made a ton of money.  The newsroom staff was 200+ strong.

Over time things began to change.  The main culprit was the internet.  Pieces of the business started to slip away.  Classified ads previously ran many pages but are almost an afterthought now.  Social media took away the need for detailed movie listings while car shopping and home buying moved on to websites managed by the sellers.  Horror of horrors, many daily comics disappeared.

Jim Heaney, the editor and executive director of Investigative Post, last week had a report on the latest round of cutting at the Buffalo News.  Heaney reported (https://www.investigativepost.org/2025/09/19/more-cuts-coming-at-the-buffalo-news/) that the News this fall will cut another five staff members from the newsroom, bringing it down to around 40.  He noted that the news staff was about 85 when the present owners, Lee Enterprises, purchased the paper five years ago.

Heaney quoted Jon Harris, a reporter and president of the Buffalo Newspaper Guild:  “We’re disappointed that we’ll have to say goodbye to four or five more newsroom colleagues later this fall, and we’re hopeful that we’ll have enough volunteers willing and ready to resign with contractual severance so we can avoid layoffs.”

Heaney also noted that the News will cease publishing New York Times stories beginning in January.  The Times reports mostly covered national and international news as well long obits about many people who most Western New Yorkers had never heard of.  Maybe Associated Press reports will be the alternative.

The News recently published a statement about their circulation.   It indicated that as of June 1, 2025, paid daily newspaper distribution was down to 23,735; it used to be about 150,000.  There are 67,430 digital subscriptions making it among the lowest in the country.

Lee Enterprises is hemorrhaging money and carries a large debt.  It has previously fought off buyout attempts from Alden Global Capital, a firm that specializes in cannibalizing whatever it can extract from the newspapers it acquires.

The further reduction of Buffalo News operations hurts the Western New York community.  Municipal and school boards, public authorities, community organizations, and businesses are subject to less scrutiny.  Useful news about things happening in the area goes unreported.  It helps explain why people are less engaged in public dialogue and why voter turnout is diminished.

To a certain degree, the same can be said about the impact of federal funding cuts to public broadcasting at stations like Buffalo Toronto Public Media (aka WBFO), the NPR station in Buffalo.

Taking a knee

Coincidently, all this is happening as national television organizations are taking a knee to snowflake politicians who cannot handle criticism.  Threats to news organizations are threats to free speech.

I cannot believe that it would ever come to this, but I feel it important to quote Senator Ted Cruz and Tucker Carlson on the subject as reported by Axios:

  • Cruz on his podcast:  FCC chair Brendan Carr’s warning to Disney, ABC’s parent, was “dangerous as hell … right out of ‘Goodfellas.’ That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going: ‘Nice bar you have here, it’d be a shame if something happened to it.’”
  • Carlson’s hope that the assassination of Charlie Kirk won’t be used as a pretext for hate-speech laws: “[I]f that does happen, there is never a more justified moment for civil disobedience than that.”

The woke right’s cancel culture is riding high at this time.  Some of them who pledge allegiance to the Constitution seem to be forgetting the First Amendment:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Bluesky  @kenkruly

Twitter/X  @kenkruly

Threads   kenkruly

Related articles

MAGA Mike CRACKS ON LIVE TV after Senate SHUTDOWN VOTE

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on MAGA...

Trump’s house of lies collapses under this undeniable fact



Look, Zohran Mamdani is not the future of the Democratic Party.

I know this is true, because the same was said of Eric Adams. New York City’s outgoing mayor did not live up to his billing. Its incoming mayor (presumably) is almost certainly not going to live up to his. The reason isn’t because Mamdani will become as corrupt as Adams became (though who knows?). The reason is that New York is New York.

Yes, it’s the largest urban center in the country. Yes, its influence cannot be overstated. But what’s good, or bad, for New York isn’t necessarily what’s good, or bad, for America. It may no longer be entirely true that all politics is local, but most of politics still is.

Once you accept the truth of this, all other considerations of Mamdani and the rest of the Democratic Party seem rather dull, as he becomes just another politician in a constellation of politicians who figured out how to appeal to a winning majority in their respective constituencies.

Once you accept that a city isn’t a metaphor for a country, or for a national party, the talk about how he’s dividing Democrats looks kinda stupid. Yes, he calls himself a democratic socialist. So what? Is that going to work in a place like Virginia? Maybe, but probably not. If it did, someone would have tried it. Since no one has, there’s your answer.

Think of it this way. Donald Trump is from New York. His business is based there. He represents the city’s elites. But he’s never won there. Three straight campaigns made no difference. Is anyone going to seriously suggest that, in this context, as New York goes, so goes the country (or so goes the GOP)? No, because that would be stupid.

Yet somehow, seemingly no one thinks how stupid it is to ask if Mamdani is the future of the Democrats, because only the Democrats, never the Republicans, are subjected to that kind of questioning. The reason for this is rooted in the Democratic Party itself, among certain elites who want to prevent it from becoming a fully realized people’s party. And they do this, foremost, by accepting as true the premise of the lies told about the Democrats by Trump and the Republicans.

What lies? First, remember that the number of actual democratic socialists in the Democratic Party (I’m talking about people who choose to call themselves by that name) is vanishingly small. Only two have any kind of national profile. (They are US Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Sanders doesn’t really count. He’s technically an independent.)

This stone-cold fact means nothing to Donald Trump. All Democrats, all liberals, all progressives, all leftists, and all socialists, democratic and otherwise, are the name. They are radical Marxist anarchist communists or whatever word salad pops into his soupy brain. There are no enemies to his right. There is nothing but enemies to his left. Does he respect his enemies enough to speak truthfully about them?

No, he lies.

His lies are what certain elites inside the Democratic Party are paying the most attention to. They are not celebrating Mamdani’s success. They are not defending him on the merits. They are not standing on the truth. They are not even standing in solidarity. What they are most focused on is the lies Donald Trump tells, which are magnified by the right-wing media complex, which are echoed by the press corps.

And what they see is either a fight they believe can’t be won or an opportunity to shiv a competing faction within the Democratic Party. Either way requires accepting as true the lies told about their own people, thus making it seem perfectly reasonable to wonder if winning a major election in America’s biggest city is good for the Democrats.

(The answer: don’t be stupid. Of course, it is.)

That these certain elites would rather surrender to lies than fight them tells us their beef with Mamdani isn’t about ideology. (It’s not about whether “democratic socialism,” or any other school of thought, would be appealing to voters outside New York.) It’s about how Mamdani, but specifically lies about him, complicates messaging efforts in a media landscape already heavily coded in favor of Donald Trump, especially of his view of the Democrats, which is that they’re all communists.

Those who are worried about Mamdani’s impact on the Democrats also take for granted the assertion that voters rejected Kamala Harris on ideological grounds – that her policies were out of touch with voters whose main concern was good-paying jobs and lower inflation.

They are ignoring that Harris actually campaigned on so-called working-class issues and that few voters could hear her working-class messaging over the din of Trump’s lies about her. The crisis facing the Democrats is not one of ideology. It’s a crisis of information. Certain elites are pretending otherwise, because it’s better for them if they do.

Mamdani’s victory is a local matter. That is the lesson for certain elites inside the party. It’s also a lesson for their loudest critics.

Certain progressives, let’s call them, believe that Mamdani’s popularity comes from focusing on class (the cost of living in New York). They believe that by doing so, he transcended “identity politics” to amass a following sizable enough to defeat the Democratic establishment.

This overlooks the fact that the establishment, in the form of the DNC and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, are backing him. But more important is again the question of ideology. Certain elites think his will turn off voters outside New York. Certain progressive think it will turn them on. They believe a class-based ideology is the unifying force that working people across the country have needed. They just can’t see it, they say, because the establishment gets in the way.

But race and class can’t be easily disentangled, not in America. To many Americans, the idea of government of, by and for the people is a perversion of the “natural order.” It flattens the hierarchies of and within race and class. This belief is bone deep in many of us. It prevents lots of white Americans from being in solidarity with nonwhite Americans, even if they face similar grinding hardships.

Most of all, such thinking overlooks the basics. Many New Yorkers struggle to make ends meet. Housing is too high. Healthcare is too expensive. Food is too much. I trust Mamdani when he says he’s a democratic socialist. But I also trust that he’s not fool enough to believe that struggle is the same as class consciousness. He identified the problem. He asked voters to give him the power to try to solve it.

That’s not ideology.

That’s just good politics.