THREAD. I noticed something fascinating: around the same time in recent days, each major corporate news source began talking about a new crime hysteria: a supposed crisis of theft from the railroad industry. But if you look deeper, something very scary is happening.
For context, recall I outlined an incredible coordination between corporate/police PR departments and corporate media reporters around retail theft. Here's a thread I wrote about how the same words, sources, and phrases began appearing everywhere at once:
For the railroad story, I'll start with the New York Times story because it is in arguably the most reputable news source and because it is one of the most dangerous and irresponsible articles. Here's the story: nytimes.com/2022/01/19/us/…
As I’ve shown time and again with the New York Times, if you just go through their stories and list the sources relied on, it becomes obvious who is influencing the news and how it is framed. This is a list of the stories’ sources in chronological order, and it’s astonishing:
-“Authorities”
-LAPD Captain
-“The police”
-LAPD Captain (twice more)
-Railroad corporation (twice)
-Railroad corp. spokesperson
-Association of American Railroads
-LAPD Captain
-Asst. prof. of "marketing"
-Railroad corp.
-Railroad spokesperson
-DA
-LAPD Captain (5 more times)
Imagine being a reporter at the most influential, prestigious news org in the U.S. and writing a major story at a time of rising fascism and just repeating police and corporate talking points about needing more punishment without seeking a single other perspective. Incredible.
In typical NYT fashion, cops make wild claims with no evidence or scrutiny. It all leads up to big moment: the last 5 paragraphs of the piece, all given to LAPD, give away the game: this is about more $$$ for cops: “They are really trying, but we are all understaffed,” he said.
What does New York Times omit? That LAPD already has an astonishing $3 billion budget, most of it spent on low-level traffic, drugs, homelessness, mental illness related stuff AND that LAPD is in midst of big budget fight trying to get a 12% increase.
The NYT also omits one of the most crucial facts you need to know. The LAPD and LA Sheriff together have 67 full-time employees working on PR and propaganda. People don't realize that they spend a lot of money and time to plant these stories:
But I digress. This story began with letter from railroad monopoly lobbyist complaining about not enough human caging by "progressive" LA prosecutor. Almost immediately, and we don't yet know how, a pro-cop CBS reporter took a viral video of tracks that corporate/police boosted.
A lot of actually thinking people like @dennisjromero@JessPish@RottenInDenmark immediately noticed some suspicious things about the "organized train robbery" story, including some potential vendettas and corporate insurance games.
If you look at all these stories, you'll see a lot of the same turns of phrase, sources, and claims. As always, it’s quickly seized on by pro-fascist groups and corporate democrats to argue for more money for police, more profitable surveillance, prosecution, and human caging.
The corporate media portray the railroad monopoly Union Pacific as some kind of hapless victim overrun by "organized" groups of "homeless" thieves. Union Pacific has more revenue ($19.5 billion) than the entire City of Los Angeles.
The corporate/police PR campaign worked almost immediately though. The Governor of California was soon seen literally picking up trash by the railroad tracks and announcing more investment in a “statewide coordination as law enforcement and prosecutors.” fox40.com/news/californi…
Alarmingly, with no evidence, Newsom compared the train thefts to the retail thefts and said “the train thieves are equally organized and need to be prosecuted as such.” Then, a “group of Republican Senators” sent a letter urging massive national federal crackdown on train theft.
And so we saw, in a few days and in real time, how cops, corporations, and media combine to concoct a narrative of *panic* around a truly minor problem compared to ecological collapse, rising fascism, lack of healthcare/housing, etc. which leads to repressive policy.
Finally, this brings me to one of the most important threads I’ve ever written. It’s about how corporate media, police, and wealthy elites work hard to shape what problems we think are urgent and what aren’t. Read it and think about it:
And see also this great reporting on profits and layoffs. Among the many huge questions NYT and other corporate media weren't asking about whether any of this is real and about what easy solutions there might be that aren't "more money for cops and cages."
Update: And here is the CBS journalist who started it all with a viral video boosting cops and a railroad monopoly. As predicted, the story is really different after a little more reporting and evidence! But cops/railroad already got what they wanted.
THREAD. One of the moments that changed my career was my first day as a public defender in D.C.'s juvenile court. When I walked into the courtroom, which is closed to the public, all the little children were fully shackled in metal chains on their wrists, waists, and feet.
I saw 9-year-olds, 11-year-olds, children with intellectual disabilities, children who had suffered profound abuse--all shackled for hours. But what shocked me most: no one had objected in years. The government officials had become desensitized to everyday brutality.
I asked the judge what she would have done if she came home from a concert and found that the babysitter had shackled her children to a table for hours. She'd probably prosecute the babysitter for child cruelty. Indiscriminate child-shackling is clearly unconstitutional.
THREAD. Something important is happening in U.S. media that I think is getting insufficient attention, and the controversy around the Los Angeles Times refusing to endorse Kamala Harris amidst her support of an ongoing genocide gets at it.
As background, a lot of uproar ensued in mainstream media circles after @nikasoonshiong’s thread stated that she supported the decision of the paper owned by her father to refuse to endorse Harris and adding that, for her, genocide is a red line:
The mainstream media is, absurdly, attempting to equate WaPo’s refusal to endorse Harris with LA Times, even though they were done for different reasons. Subscriber numbers show normal people get that, with WaPo losing far more readers. Reasons matter:
Thread. Today’s front page in the New York Times is a good lesson in two of the most important tactics in propaganda.
First, notice the euphemism “pragmatism.” The idea that people who support enormous injustice and terrible policies are “pragmatic” is one of the most subtly ideological and dangerous characteristics of corporate news. This trope is used for decades.
People become unable to distinguish between someone who supports lofty values but who is wisely playing 4D chess by pretending not to support them for years versus someone who actually doesn’t support, say, universal health care, social security, peace, economic equality, etc
THREAD. Something very weird is going on at ProPublica. It's hard to tell whether a few well-meaning people are getting lost or whether there is a Copaganda sleeper cell inside the non-profit newsroom.
First, ProPublica is a public charity supposedly dedicated to "Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest." But in recent years, its reporters have peddled some of the most nefarious copaganda: fearmongering about not enough spending on prosecution supposedly causing crime.
In 2022, ProPublica journalist Alec MacGillis published one of the most shoddy articles of the post-George Floyd, early pandemic era. He claimed "the cause" of "the" violent crime "wave" were court backlogs. I explained how incoherent/dangerous this was: equalityalec.substack.com/p/when-good-jo…
A problem in our society is that people fail to draw inferences from facts. For example, it requires depravity to do what the Democratic Michigan Attorney General just did—make up a lie for the purpose of deceiving ordinary people on one of the most important topics of our time.
But the way the lie is reported and discussed by many people is not a serious effort to grapple with what it means for a person to intentionally try to distort other people’s experience of our world in support of violence and inequality.
A rule of thumb is to think hard about what kind of person thinks to themselves: I’m going to use my access to mass media to lie right now. And think about what kinds of reasons they have for the lie and who benefits—and tragically, whose lives are on the line because of it.
THREAD. One persistent form of propaganda is the refusal of corporate media to report critical context about judges when it reports on legal cases. Today's reporting on the TikTok case is a good example.
The entire New York Times article on the TikTok case is based on the supposed skepticism of two federal judges to TikTok's arguments, but the paper omits they are two of the most right-wing judges in the appellate judiciary, appointed by Trump and Reagan. nytimes.com/2024/09/16/tec…
The paper hides the political backgrounds and prior controversial positions and rulings of the two judges. It's as if "the law" is something neutral, that it doesn't matter who the judges are or who appoints them, that this is not a space where power is contested, etc.