THREAD. I noticed something fascinating: many of the reporters concocting the new hysteria over "retail theft" are using the *exact same* words and patterns in each story. It's pretty wild. Let's take a look:
Let's use today's dangerous @chicagotribune article as an example. First thing to notice: who does the newspaper choose to use as sources? Here they are in chronological order: chicagotribune.com/business/ct-bi…
1. CEO of local retail lobby 2. National Retail Federation 3. Police 4. CEO of state retail lobby (5 paras!) 5. CEO of World Business Chicago 6. Pres. of restaurant lobby 7. CEO of Illnois Hotel lobby (7 paras!) 8. New hotel CEO (6 paras!) 9. CEO from earlier (7 more paras!)
Does this look familiar? Check out the sources in the very similar recent @AP article about "brazen" San Francisco "retail theft."
I cannot stress this enough: when you see articles like this, ask yourself: Why is this news? How did it get to the reporters? What is the goal of the article? How did they choose which voices to quote and which to ignore? Who benefits?
Next, did you notice that this article continues the pattern of the same exact words and phrases as other similar recent articles across outlets?
"brazen"
"organized crime"
"flash mob"
"smash and grab."
How is this happening?
One thing that many casual news readers don't know is that articles, and the specific words used in them, are often carefully crafted by expensive corporate marketing consultants. It's something wealthy business groups pay a lot of money for.
There is a big marketing industry for corporations and cops that teaches them to use the same words and phrases when they pitch journalists. It's not a coincidence that different journalists are all using same words, and those words were carefully chosen by wealthy people.
This is intentional, and it subtly changes the way we think. For example, the slick phrase "smash and grab" is pure marketing. It's vague, scary, and hard to fact check. Such theft is likely close to 0% of retail thefts, but it's all we're talking about. What does it even mean?
The result of all of this is a public massively distracted from far more important issues. Did you know that these same corporations engage in wage theft every day that dwarf all other property crime combined? Read this whole thread:
We must help each other become more critical consumers of the news, and we must hold journalists accountable for the role they are playing in scaring the public into deeply destructive human caging policies that crush poor people.
UPDATE: it’s especially interesting to compare the breathless Chicago tribune reporting with actual facts:
I hope the reporter @RobertChannick will publicly explain how he got this story idea. Who came to you? What was the pitch? Why did you decide it was “news,” and how did you decide on the sources you chose? It’s important to have these discussions publicly.
If you want more depth, I’ve written a longer piece about the massive and profitable bureaucracy behind these narratives, using hundreds of examples. yalelawjournal.org/forum/the-puni…
UPDATE: I'm wondering why @RobertChannick didn't mention same retail sources have ongoing federal lobbying campaign re:"brazen" theft. Many poor people will be caged b/c of the hysteria reporters are stoking, all collateral damage for a corporate campaign?
Few stories better capture modern policing than this one about a conspiracy of private corporate interests paying off-duty state troopers as part of a "shadow force" to cleanse downtown Nashville of homeless people using metal chains, cages, and violence.
It's great to see local news covering issues like this by reporter @JFinleyreports because it helps to expose the vast bulk of what police do: only 4% of their time is spent on "violent" crime, and much of it is done to make people money: wsmv.com/2025/05/29/sha…
But it's vital to understand this is not some egregious "bad apple" conspiracy particular to Tennessee or Nashville. It's important to understand that local policing looks like this in every large U.S. city, regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans are in control.
THREAD. A lot of attention is rightly going to Medicaid cuts and other very bad things in Trump's bill passed in the House, but there's something that isn't getting attention, that is difficult to find in any news coverage, but that will fundamentally alter life for all of us.
The bill provides $160 billion in border/immigration funding in next 4.5 years. It's hard to describe the unprecedented scope of this, but I'll try: tens of thousands of armed agents in every corner of society are going to be nearly immune from state prosecution or civil suits.
This article describes it more, but I want to focus on a few things. First, when you build infrastructure like this and create new jobs/pensions for right-wing unions, it's hard to ever remove them. A new gestapo could become a permanent feature of life. wola.org/analysis/160-b…
See if you can spot the difference between the New York Times headline and the article's own description of what actually happened, which will be read by far fewer people.
One of the standard media tropes is the "clash," which leaves casual news consumers with the vague sense that opposing sides were each violent, even though what's often happening is that an unaccountable violent repressive force is brutalizing people complaining about injustice.
It's also worth noting the shameful conduct of university administrators. If you think about what they mean by the word "safety" here the implications are dark and Orwellian for our society.
THREAD. I have a chapter about this person in my Copaganda book. He’s considered one of the leading lights among Democratic Party officials.
At a time of rising authoritarianism, he normalizes the idea of a society where everyone can be questioned and stopped at any time. I cannot begin to describe how dangerous this is.
Too much abhorrent/ignorant to cover on social media, but it's completely ignorant of what is being done with digital IDs in authoritarian India, e.g., and makes assumptions about immigration, "citizenship," and the value of human life that should horrify people of good will.
THREAD. This is one of the more remarkable stories I have seen in my time studying state violence and working in law. But it's also an exercise in propaganda. And it's unbelievable how terrible the U.S. media coverage is. One thing in particular is important to see.
Background: this follows up on U.S. kidnapping people, rushing them onto planes as courts tried to stop it, and then defying court orders, with White House taunting courts and elected officials about how a person they agree was wrongly trafficked will never be coming back.
The kidnapping people off the street and then sending them to a prison (for life?) in a foreign country with no due process and without any law permitting indefinite detention--and then defying court orders--would be enough to end the U.S. legal system as we know it.
THREAD. As authoritarianism rises, people still don't know the story of what Democrats and news outlets did after the fake shoplifting epidemic: created one of the most alarming expansions of surveillance in modern times. The details of what Democrats + cops did will shock you.
First, as I explain in my new book Copaganda, everyone now acknowledges the "retail theft" and "shoplifting" epidemic was fake. Shoplifting was not up--it was **down.** And property crime at historic lows. It was entirely a fabrication. But why?
The companies had their own reasons--distracting from the real reasons they were closing stories, lobbying for various crackdowns on online commerce, and socializing the costs of security to the public so they could cut costs. But the real story is the police.