April 2026
It pains me greatly when something so well worn as January 6th 2021 is handled either so lazily or as continued propaganda. Summarizing the events as “2,000 Trump supporters ransacked the United States Capital” and “pepper sprayed, bludgeoned, stabbed, and tasered people including police officers. They smashed windows. All told rioters caused about $3 million in damage to the Capital Building. Seven people died.”
I’m not a fan of Trump. You can hate Trump more than the worse humanitarian atrocities in history. You can love Trump more than as an anti-hero pushing back on The Blob. None of that changes who died during the Capital Insurgency.
- 1 protestor was shot and killed breaking through a window at the scene
- 2 protestors had some form of a heart attack at the protests
- 1 protestor died of “amphetamine intoxication”
- 1 police officer died the next day from a stroke. He had been pepper sprayed.
- At least 4 officers at the protest killed themselves within a short period after January 6th
1) An objective person simply trying to navigate their world must learn facts irrespective of subjective interest. Up until the “7 people died”, the summary was fine enough. Following that introduction, which described that detailed violence, immediately with “7 people died” clearly suggests they died at the hands of the protestors. That is obviously untrue. It could be made clear in a short sentence. It wasn’t made clear out of atrocious journalism or intentional deception. It's either incompetence or insidiousness. Stupid or liar? Either are not what you want from a journalistic platform purporting to be of the highest ideals.
2) Anyone who has put in a guest bathroom in their house or bought a mid tier minivan of late knows, $3 million is nothing in terms of grand scales. I’m not absolving anyone of guilt or belittling $3 million. If I had $3 million, I'd be free of financial shackles and work-a-day requirements. $3 million gets you a Starbucks in a gentrified area. This ain't your grandfather's $3 million. I LOVE the subject of this episode. I want to learn. I want to be aware. I don't want to patronize tribal bias sellouts. And so made difficult are the many choices of life. I hate the double standard with the solemn introduction of the January 6 events, including mentioning $3 million in damages juxtaposed to the hundreds of millions in damage to cities, many small businesses, and government buildings some of which were occupied for months, Planet Money/The Indicator framed those events were framed as rational good-faith citizen protests with first person humanizing accounts. (See BLM Minneapolis protest episode.) I’m not taking sides on any of the protester's views or motivations. I’m taking a side against The Indicator and NPR‘s framing. Because they clearly have taken sides, and not on the side of journalism. It is their right to do so, and it is my right to call out that they are an organization solely motivated by political agenda. And that’s fine. But they are not objective truth tellers. They do not speak truth to power. They are propagandists who speak for a certain group of power brokers and their acolytes. They are not journalists. They may practice journalism at times. But there are not journalists by nature.
I came back to The Indicator and Planet Money after the trend of making everything about race ended because people got treatment for that mental illness/mania - or it’s just dormant. I like being alive. The world is complex. I’m comfortable living in the gray. I’m unsure of many things. I accept some bias from everyone including people, professions, and institutions claiming not to be. I know what NPR is. We all do. Planet Money and The Indicator are fringe podcasts on NPR - in a good way - because the observable world doesn’t care about Ivy Tower baked racial and gender ideology. Consequently, those interested in economics and finance - no matter political leaning - have a penchant for objectivity first.
Original Comment October 2021
I subscribed after being a long time Planet Money listener. Over the last year I powered through the “as the wind blows” episodes and the holding out of vowels to finish sentences. (Is a Valley girl speech impediment on par with vocal fry?) Irritations can be suppressed. I can go to my safe space and focus on the content. However, the content is now just fluffing the echo chamber. I can’t take the lack of self-awareness. Why does making a blockbuster franchise movie like Bond mean YOU MUST use a male actor of color? That implies, if there’s only one choice, every modern choice must be a person of color. That’s obvious nonsense. Use whoever you want for whatever you want. If you think today’s market or morality dictates only BIPOCs, you’re either engaging in discrimination or - more likely - treating BIPOCs as a trend. Moreover, why is it difficult to think an audience likes a male 007? It’s not that a female 007 movie couldn’t be great. Of course it could. But the franchise has been a hit for six decades with a formula. To change it under the guise of “half the world is female” is mind-blowingly dense rationalization. You CAN reinvent pizza but people like the basic conceit of pizza as is. It’s ok. People might like what they like. Why isn’t there a female NFL? Why isn’t female MMA, pro/college basketball, boxing as popular as male version? The answers are obvious. Well, obvious unless you don’t believe in science. And NPR doesn’t believe in science anymore …or leaving big coastal cities. Journalism is dead.
