When Journalists Declare In Unison That Something Has Been Debunked, Assume The Opposite Is True mtracey.substack.com/p/when-journal…
This doesn't mean you should just automatically believe that every claim the media declares "debunked" is in every instance 100% true. But you should revise your understanding of what the term "debunked" is intended to convey: 
A touching homage to the Media Debunker Squad from Substack commenter Scott
It was presumptively debunked just by appearing on Substack, which is a very harmful and violent platform that gives safe harbor to dangerous misinformation, unlike corporate media
https://twitter.com/academic_dud/status/1403389533186531332
The funniest Media Debunkers are those who are so proud of themselves for debunking stuff like QAnon. How would society ever persist without these brave debunkers!
I was informed that my post has been debunked and must be unbunked. So I tried to unbunk it, only to discover that it's been rebunked. What a load of bunk
The next time a falsehood promulgated by the Democratic Party and its appendages in the media is widely declared to have been “debunked” let me know and I’ll consider revising the definition. But don’t hold your breath
Citing documentary evidence, the Inspector General of the Interior Department just “debunked” the widely-repeated claim that Lafayette Square was cleared that day specifically to facilitate the Trump photo op. But virtually no one in media is using “debunked” in this context. Odd
https://twitter.com/corruptnovelist/status/1403516694073688072
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
