This is absolutely how mainstream US outlets think: exactly what is said there by Rid (one of those centrist Professor outlets use to elevate their unhinged conspiracy theories with a facade of expertise):
*We have no idea if this conspiracy is true, but we will say it anyway.*
There is no question -- none -- that mainstream US news outlets disseminate more unhinged, unproven conspiracy theories -- and do far more damage with them -- than QAnon, or whichever fringe group they want you to focus on, can achieve in 1,000 years.
See for yourself:
US media outlets outside of right-wing sites were desperate not to report the Hunter emails and to block their reporters from doing so. So they just started printing that it was "Russian disinformation," knowing there was no basis for that, until they could figure out what to do.
One of the US's best reporters, @mtaibbi, just published an great and well-researched article documenting how many lies US media outlets are telling to protect Biden.
It's on Substack. I doubt any liberal-left outlet would publish it. That's why Taibbi is more popular than ever.
Independent journalists like Taibbi, and platforms and outlets that won't censor, are more rare than ever, especially now when most national journalists are in full-on Elect Biden mode at the expense of everything else. Support them:
The only silver lining in all of this is that media outlets are so desperate to help Biden win that they're not even pretending anymore. No pretense. There's great clarity in that. To the NPR Public Editor Note, the CNN panel and that Rid quote, add this stunning @camanpour clip:
No purported news outlet has worth if it constrains or censors writers and reporters and forces them to advance the partisan preferences of editors or to flatter the ideological presuppositions of their audience. Support independent journalism: only those outlets that are free.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Left-liberal Twitch streamers and YouTube shows knew that to attract a pre-election audience (money), they had to tell their viewers Kamala was *clearly* winning.
So they randomly anointed a random Twitter user, @Ettingermentumv, into a data guru, who assured them all of it.
For months -- including just a couple weeks before the election -- this fraudulent partisan data guru kept saying the polls were wrong, the polling experts were wrong, the secret numbers he saw made clear that Kamala wasn't just ahead but ahead by a good distance.
This is as much a problem with partisan independent media as partisan corporate shows: they have to validate their viewers' desire to believe things even if untrue.
So after all the profit and Substack subscriptions were sold by this fraud, he wrote his "I-was-wrong" confession:
The belief that Joe Rogan and those like him are just an updated Fox News -- a non-stop messaging of right-wing ideology -- is beyond stupid.
Those podcasts grew organically: in part because they're not ideological or partisan. They're normal conversations: how humans speak.
Depicting Rogan as a far-right ideologue is something only those who never heard his show would say. AOC separated from Bernie's campaign after Bernie touted Rogan's endorsement.
He is a vehement defender of same-sex marriage. He believes in full freedom for adults' personal lives. He frequently argues that corporate power is suffocating the lives of ordinary people, etc. etc.
The most consequential - yet overlooked - Trump era change is many debates are no longer shaped by old left/right divisions, but instead by who loves, respects, and is loyal to institutions of authority (Dems) and who believes they're fundamentally corrupted (Trump supporters).
Today's NYT column by @ezraklein notes obvious exceptions (abortion, gun control), yet argues the key difference between Kamala and Trump voters is how much one likes US ruling institutions.
Hence, Dems love CIA, FBI, DHS, corporate media. Even views of corporate power changed.
@ezraklein Think about key debates. Which is right or left?
- Trust in large media corporations.
- Opposition to BigTech/state internet censorship.
- Opposition to funding endless wars (Ukraine).
- Eagerness to remain tied to NATO and EU-based institutions.
While many people in the West believe that Russia/Putin are "isolated" - because their media tells them that -- 2 dozen world leaders are in Russia now for a 3-day BRICS conference.
BRICS itself includes the 2 most-populous countries and 4 of the top 10 most populous.
Beyond the founding 5 (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), it expanded to 5 more (including key US "partners" Egypt, UAE and maybe Saudi).
They "account for 45% of the global population" and 28% of global economy.
Key goal: a financial system independent of US dollar.
There's Western skepticism and even mockery that this huge confederation of countries -- united over perceived abuses of US/EU sanctions -- could create a non-dollar system. @TheEconomist takes it seriously.
Inacreditável que Alexandre de Moraes esteja constantemente concentrando em si próprio a figura de suposta vítima, investigador policial, promotor e o juiz - em seus próprios interesses.
Não há democracia onde uma pessoa pode investigar criminalmente o jornalismo que a reporta.
@lf_ponde @folha Aqui também: um ótimo artigo de @lygia_maria sobre a visão perturbada e perigosa de Moraes, a marca registrada de uma mentalidade tirana:
Que qualquer crítica ou questionamento feita ele é em si "um ataque à democracia" e, portanto, um crime.