Editorial of May 22, 2025
Is the Media Doing Our Thinking for Us?
We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: Regardless of where you sit on the political spectrum—left, right or center—if you are getting all your news from one source, without doing some actual follow-up on your own, you might not be thinking for yourself. Don’t get us wrong. We’re all susceptible to being convinced, persuaded, influenced, “educated.” But, from time to time, it behooves us to take a step back and consider whether we might be being misled, or misinformed.
Pivoting away from politics for just a moment, let’s take a look at Luke Meagher, who critiques fashion shows and red carpet fashion on social media. In a “Vogue” article published in 2023, Andre-Naquian Wheeler wrote: “At 25 years old, with no previous ties to a company or publication, Meagher has fashioned himself as a must-watch and authoritative fashion critic online under the moniker HauteLeMode.”
One of our staff members recently discovered Meagher and has been enjoying his videos on YouTube, not only because of all the stunning (and sometimes ridiculous, let’s be honest) fashion, but also because, along with his engaging critiques, Meagher provides interesting background and fashion history—“this dress is a nod to a similar gown worn by so-and-so in 1962,” “inspired by the art from the Dark Ages and Christian symbolism,” “a reference to fall 2009,” etc.
Meagher is so confident, convincing and compelling that, by the end of his critique, he has often changed the viewer’s mind about what they first considered to be an ugly ensemble or just plain crazy couture. Now, we think Meagher knows what he’s talking about. Our inclination is to believe that he does and that, by watching his videos, we are learning about fashion and better understanding what we are looking at. But without further research, and without giving equal time to other fashion critics and experts, how can we be sure?
Which brings us back to politics, pundits and the legacy media, and the purpose of this editorial. We think it’s time for a little self-reflection—for us, and for our readers. And to that end, here are the questions we have been asking ourselves that we ask you to consider as well:
Do you get your news from multiple sources with differing coverage perspectives, or do you avoid coverage which offers a viewpoint in opposition to your own?
Do you get your news only in soundbites, or do you seek more in-depth coverage of the news topics that are of interest to you?
Do you pay attention to what the opposing “side” is actually saying and doing, or are you just following the headlines?
Do you pay attention to what your own “side” is actually saying and doing, or are you just following the headlines?
Do you agree entirely with one side of the political spectrum, or are there viewpoints of the opposition with which you are also in agreement?
Do you disagree entirely with one side of the political spectrum, or are there viewpoints of your own party with which you also disagree?
Given the release of the Biden-Hur special counsel audio, and the books that have now been published regarding the cover up of former President Joe Biden’s mental decline by his administration and by the legacy media, will you be likely to turn to multiple news sources for information from all perspectives moving forward?
We’re not advocating here for any one political party or viewpoint. We are, however, emphasizing that—by accepting any legacy media reporting simply at face value in this day and age—we may be doing ourselves and our country a great disservice. We’re asking you to consider whether you are truly thinking for yourself or allowing the media—left, right or center—to do your thinking for you.
And are you comfortable with any of this? Because we are not.
