Elon Musk recently lobbed another one of his trademark grenades on X: “Because the legacy media IS the far left.” Short, sharp, and delivered with the subtlety of a SpaceX rocket launch, it’s the kind of statement that makes you chuckle, groan, or both—depending on how much coffee you’ve had. But let’s unpack this, shall we? With the help of a chart from @DavidRozado tracking the frequency of “far-right” and “far-left” in news outlets from 2000 to 2023, we can see Musk’s quip isn’t just a tweet—it’s a data-backed roast of the legacy media’s cozy relationship with the far left.
The chart, a treasure trove of pixelated awkwardness, shows outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and NBC News tossing around “far-right” like it’s confetti at a parade, while “far-left” barely registers as a whisper. Take the New York Times, for instance—its R/L ratio (far-right mentions to far-left mentions) is a whopping 5.77, meaning it mentions “far-right” nearly six times for every “far-left.” CNN’s not far behind at 7.99, and even the Los Angeles Times clocks in at 4.96. Meanwhile, Fox News, the lone outlier, leans the other way with an L/R ratio of 1.55, but that’s hardly surprising—it’s the media’s designated punching bag for “far-right” accusations.
So, what’s the story here? Are these outlets just bad at geography, confusing “far left” with their editorial boardroom’s latitude? Or is Musk onto something with his deadpan declaration? Let’s wade through the numbers with the enthusiasm of a robot vacuum hitting a corner—slowly, methodically, and with zero excitement.
A Brief History of Media Bias, or “How We Got Here Without a Map”
Back in 2000, the chart shows a fairly even keel. “Far-right” and “far-left” were both niche buzzwords, flickering like distant stars on the media horizon. The New York Times barely mentioned either, its relative frequency hovering near zero, as if the terms were too spicy for the morning paper’s delicate palate. CNN, NBC, and others weren’t much different—quietly ignoring the extremes, presumably because they were too busy covering Y2K or the dot-com bust.
But then, around 2010, something shifted. The “far-right” line on the graph spiked like a caffeine addict’s heart rate. The New York Times started throwing “far-right” into headlines with the zeal of a toddler discovering a new crayon box—red, blue, and mostly red. By 2023, the pink bars (representing “far-right”) dominate the charts for most outlets, peaking at absurd heights. The New York Times hits 5.0 x 10^-5 in relative frequency, whatever that means—probably enough to fill a thesaurus with synonyms for “extremist.” Meanwhile, “far-left” (the blue line) languishes like a forgotten houseplant, barely creeping above zero. It’s as if these outlets decided “far-left” was a secret they weren’t allowed to whisper, lest it upset their invite to the next Berkeley rally.
Musk’s tweet isn’t just a jab—it’s a statistical punchline. If legacy media mentions “far-right” five to eight times more often than “far-left,” as the data shows, you’d be forgiven for thinking they’ve got a standing ovation reserved for anyone waving a Che Guevara flag. The Wall Street Journal is a partial exception, with an R/L of 2.15, but even it leans toward “far-right” mentions by a comfortable margin. Fox News, predictably, flips the script, but its L/R of 1.55 suggests it’s less about balance and more about mirroring the left’s obsession with opposites.
Why the Silence on “Far-Left”? A Mystery Wrapped in a Bias Sandwich
Let’s speculate, dryly. Maybe legacy media outlets are just allergic to self-reflection. The New York Times and CNN, with their R/L ratios of 5.77 and 7.99, seem to have decided that “far-left” is a mythical creature—like Bigfoot, but with better Instagram followers. Their editorial boards might argue they’re “centering marginalized voices” or “challenging power structures,” but the data paints a different picture: they’re so far left, they’ve forgotten the concept exists as a label.
Consider the Washington Post, with an R/L of 4.56. Its coverage of, say, Occupy Wall Street or Black Lives Matter might as well have been written by the far left’s PR team—glowing profiles, sympathetic op-eds, and nary a critical word about radical tactics or funding. Meanwhile, any mention of the Tea Party or MAGA gets the “far-right” stamp faster than you can say “horse and buggy economics.” It’s not reporting; it’s a curated playlist for the progressive choir.
And then there’s Bloomberg, with an R/L of 5.43, proving even the business world’s mouthpiece can’t resist the lure of “far-right” fearmongering. Are they worried about alienating their Wall Street readers? Or are they just following the herd, where “far-left” is a term too hot to handle, like a solar panel in Arizona?
Elon’s Take: Deadpan Genius or Just Trolling?
Musk’s tweet—“Because the legacy media IS the far left”—lands like a SpaceX landing drone: precise, unapologetic, and a little bit absurd. He’s not wrong to point out the asymmetry in the graph, but the dry humor comes from the sheer obviousness of it. If legacy media were a GPS, they’d be stuck on a cul-de-sac labeled “Far Left Lane, No Exit.” Their obsession with “far-right” isn’t just bias—it’s a branding exercise, a way to signal virtue while conveniently ignoring their own ideological backyard.
The chart doesn’t lie: outlets like CBS (R/L = 4.2) and NBC (R/L = 5.84) are so focused on “far-right” that “far-left” might as well be a password they forgot. It’s as if their style guides decree, “Thou shalt not utter ‘far-left’ unless it’s to praise a protest chant.” Musk, with his knack for punching up, sees this and throws a digital elbow. His tweet isn’t a conspiracy theory—it’s a data point wrapped in a smirk.
The Legacy Media’s Defense: “We’re Just Following the News!”
Of course, the legacy media would scoff at Musk’s claim. “We’re just reporting the facts!” they’d say, adjusting their glasses with the confidence of someone who still owns a fax machine. “The far right is more newsworthy—look at the data!” And sure, they’ve got a point: extremist movements on the right have made headlines, from January 6 to QAnon. But the chart tells a different story. Why does “far-right” dominate by such a margin if the far left doesn’t exist in their vocabulary? Are Antifa rallies just quiet book clubs? Are socialist policies too boring to label?
The New York Post, with its L/R of 1.07, is the closest to balance, but even it tilts slightly toward “far-right” mentions. It’s as if the entire industry agreed to play a game of “Spot the Extremist,” and the far left got a permanent pass. Musk’s tweet, delivered with the dryness of a Martian desert, cuts through the noise: if you’re not calling out the far left, you might be it.
What This Means for the Rest of Us
For the average reader, this asymmetry is a snooze-fest of predictability. Pick up a Los Angeles Times (R/L = 4.96), and you’ll find “far-right” sprinkled like paprika on every third article. Tune into CNN, and you’ll hear it chanted like a mantra. Meanwhile, the far left gets a free pass, lurking in the shadows of op-eds and primetime panels, never named but always implied as the moral north star.
Musk, of course, isn’t here to solve this. He’s too busy launching satellites and tweeting memes to play media critic full-time. But his throwaway line—“Because the legacy media IS the far left”—sticks because it’s so absurdly true. The graph from @DavidRozado isn’t just a chart; it’s a mirror held up to an industry that’s lost its way, wandering so far left it can’t see the road back.
The Future: Will Legacy Media Ever Find the Center?
Don’t hold your breath. The chart shows no signs of convergence. By 2023, the pink bars for “far-right” are still towering, while “far-left” remains a blue ghost in the machine. Fox News, with its L/R of 1.55, is the lone holdout, but it’s more of a counterbalance than a beacon of balance. The rest— New York Times, CNN, NBC—are locked in a feedback loop, where “far-right” is the villain du jour, and “far-left” is the unspoken hero.
Musk’s tweet, in its dry, unvarnished glory, suggests they might as well admit it: legacy media isn’t reporting the far left; it’s being the far left. And if they ever do mention “far-left,” it’ll probably be in a puff piece about vegan communes or free college initiatives—hardly the fire-and-brimstone they reserve for “far-right” bogeymen.
Conclusion: A Dry Laugh at the End of the Road
So, what’s the takeaway? Elon Musk’s tweet isn’t just a jab—it’s a data-driven punchline. The legacy media’s obsession with “far-right” and silence on “far-left,” as shown in @DavidRozado’s chart, isn’t just bias; it’s a worldview so entrenched, it’s practically a GPS coordinate: 38.9072° N, 77.0369° W—Washington, D.C., where the far left holds court. Whether they’re sipping lattes at the Washington Post or pontificating on CNN, they’ve forgotten the other side of the spectrum exists as anything but a punching bag.
Maybe Musk should launch a satellite to beam some balance back to Earth. Or maybe he’ll just tweet another zinger and let the legacy media stew in their own asymmetry. Either way, the chart doesn’t lie, and neither does his deadpan humor. Legacy media isn’t just near the far left—it is the far left, clad in ink and irony, wondering why their subscriptions keep tanking.
Share:
DOGE Unleashed: Trump’s Regulatory Haircut Begins, and It’s a Buzzcut
Taxpayers Are Funding Union Side Hustles—and Congress...