Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues  (Read 1032340 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3650 on: January 27, 2023, 08:51:41 AM »
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was December 14, 2012

And?

Someone asked.

Unless I missed it, still no answer to what did he say (why did he say it)  and when did he retract it?

Forget the dollar amount, was the jury wrong? Were the facts in the case wrong?
----------------

John Lennon, 1968:
"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow.
"

 - That was advice for the Left.  For the right maybe we could draw the line at Sandy Hook deniers.  Even if they are really nice people and right most of the time.  (I'm not saying he is. I know very little about him.)


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3651 on: January 27, 2023, 08:52:56 AM »
Wanted to verify if it was before Rogan's comments.

Anyway, as interesting as Rogan's comments are, and as pertinent as the free speech arguments are, I'm still thinking he is a seriously unsound example for us to use when we have such a plethora of serious qualified people who have been cancelled and their careers ended.
 

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3652 on: January 27, 2023, 09:56:27 AM »
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was December 14, 2012

And?

Someone asked.

Unless I missed it, still no answer to what did he say (why did he say it)  and when did he retract it?

Forget the dollar amount, was the jury wrong? Were the facts in the case wrong?
----------------

John Lennon, 1968:
"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow.
"

 - That was advice for the Left.  For the right maybe we could draw the line at Sandy Hook deniers.  Even if they are really nice people and right most of the time.  (I'm not saying he is. I know very little about him.)

John Lennon is dead and forgotten by today’s generation, but they are being taught by the generation that was taught by the people who carried pictures of Chairman Mao.

CRT doctrine would probably soon be familiar to what Patty Hearst was taught in SLA captivity.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
2nd post ie: Alex Jones
« Reply #3653 on: January 28, 2023, 08:13:11 AM »
since I never listened to AJ only know of him the way I know of QAnon - through Left wing media

I was curious about his Sandy Hook denial up to 2019 and what that was even all about :

I found this on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd post ie: Alex Jones
« Reply #3654 on: January 28, 2023, 08:56:00 AM »
since I never listened to AJ only know of him the way I know of QAnon - through Left wing media

I was curious about his Sandy Hook denial up to 2019 and what that was even all about :

I found this on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories

It's hard to imagine the federal government doing something criminal to further gun control.
 :roll:

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3655 on: January 28, 2023, 07:34:16 PM »
Hard to know whether the acknowledgement of the reality of Sandy Hook was sincere or prompted by the lawsuit.

Regardless, I have had a hard on for AJ for a long time and I file him under a mental heading similar to that of DEBKA-- even though sometimes right, the irresponsibility, the bombast, and the recklessness of the accusations make him unworthy of association.

We have plenty of other sounder people with whom to make our case with those whom we wish to persuade.  With AJ we lose credibility with these people.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3656 on: January 28, 2023, 08:09:19 PM »
Hard to know whether the acknowledgement of the reality of Sandy Hook was sincere or prompted by the lawsuit.

Regardless, I have had a hard on for AJ for a long time and I file him under a mental heading similar to that of DEBKA-- even though sometimes right, the irresponsibility, the bombast, and the recklessness of the accusations make him unworthy of association.

We have plenty of other sounder people with whom to make our case with those whom we wish to persuade.  With AJ we lose credibility with these people.

AJ allows unheard voices, such as Matt Bracken and Joseph Paul Watson exposure they otherwise wouldn't have.

AJ has been right about many things, including Epstein, the WEF and the ClotShot.

Yes, his professional wrestling level histrionics irritates the living shit out of me, but there is wheat to be found amidst the chaff.


When does the MSM get sued for the "Trump is a Russian agent" lies?


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3657 on: January 28, 2023, 08:51:52 PM »
Point acknowledged, but we have plenty of people who think that Epstein was killed, and plenty of people who warn of the WEF and of the vaxxes who come without the baggage of AJ.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Sandy Hook
« Reply #3658 on: January 28, 2023, 09:31:12 PM »
since I never listened to AJ only know of him the way I know of QAnon - through Left wing media

I was curious about his Sandy Hook denial up to 2019 and what that was even all about :

I found this on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting_conspiracy_theories

Thank you ccp.

If I read this right, the massacre occurred in 2012.

Adam Lanza shot and killed 26 people. Twenty of the victims were children between six and seven years old, and the other six were adult staff members.

The man under discussion denied it and was a large voice on the airwaves.  Was sued in 2018.  Admitted it happened in 2019. Seven years later!

The man is a moron, or am I missing something .

A jury said his reckless and false speech injured, damaged people.

Falsely holler "fire" in crowded theater?  It was something like that.  At least a jury thought so.

Who cares what his views on other issues, taxes, spending, cultural issues, defense, border security, gun control.

Main point was already offered.  If he is on our side, he makes our side look bad, really bad.

It's been said, a moderated forum is like having invited guests in your living room for discussions on topics of interest.

Whether or not the shootings and deaths occurred seems like an easy enough thing to verify, if so inclined. There were witnesses, death certificates, funerals, loud sounds, blood on the floors and walls. He stuck with massacre denial for seven years? Why wouldn't you ask that guy to leave the discussion?  If the massacre really happened, he's a moron, and a jerk.  Right?
« Last Edit: January 29, 2023, 07:13:06 AM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Response to Doug, part 1
« Reply #3659 on: January 29, 2023, 09:14:32 AM »
"A jury said his reckless and false speech injured, damaged people.

Falsely holler "fire" in crowded theater?  It was something like that.  At least a jury thought so."


https://reason.com/2022/10/27/yes-you-can-yell-fire-in-a-crowded-theater/

Yes, You Can Yell 'Fire' in a Crowded Theater
On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito repeated the common myth that "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" is unprotected speech.
EMMA CAMP | 10.27.2022 2:57 PM

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Samuel Alito next to a cartoon of a theater on fire on a tan background
(Illustration: Lex Villena; Maksim Pauliukevich )
Though it is a popular misconception, it's perfectly legal to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. However, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito hasn't seemed to have gotten the message.

Despite sitting on the highest court in the land, directly deciding what is—and isn't—protected by the First Amendment, Alito delivered repeated on Tuesday a common constitutional myth. Whether the remark reveals a deep-seated misconception about First Amendment jurisprudence or was simply a momentary slip-up is unclear.

On Tuesday evening, Justice Alito, delivered remarks at The Heritage Foundation, as part of the think tank's Joseph Story Distinguished Lecture. During the lecture, Alito spoke on a wide swath of issues—ranging from his early legal career to substantive due process. He also expounded at length on the state of discourse and free speech on college campuses, particularly law schools. 

"Based on what I have read and what has been told to me by students, it's pretty abysmal, and it's disgraceful, and it's really dangerous for our future as a united democratic country," Alito said. "We depend on freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is essential."

Alito emphasized the particular role that law schools have in fostering "rational debate" and holding firm to the principle of free speech, saying that some schools were "not carrying out their responsibility."

However, Alito's trouble began when he was asked where he would "draw the line between protected and unprotected speech." Alito emphasized the importance of protecting "any speech involving public issues, involving politics, government, history, economics, law, science, religion, philosophy, the arts," but he noted that the First Amendment doesn't protect all speech, including "extortion and threats," defamation, and "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater."

However, Alito is simply wrong that "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" is unprotected speech. The erroneous idea comes from the 1919 case Schenk v. United States. The case concerned whether distributing anti-draft pamphlets could lead to a conviction under the Espionage Act—and had nothing to do with fires or theaters.

In his opinion, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." However, this idea was introduced as an analogy, meant to illustrate that, as Trevor Timm wrote in The Atlantic in 2012, "the First Amendment is not absolute. It is what lawyers call dictum, a justice's ancillary opinion that doesn't directly involve the facts of the case and has no binding authority." The phrase, though an oft-repeated axiom in debates about the First Amendment, is simply not the law of the land now, nor has it ever been—something made all the more apparent when Schenk v. United States was largely overturned in 1969 by Brandenburg v. Ohio.

"Anyone who says 'you can't shout fire! in a crowded theatre' is showing that they don't know much about the principles of free speech, or free speech law—or history," Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression President Greg Lukianoff wrote in 2021. "This old canard, a favorite reference of censorship apologists, needs to be retired. It's repeatedly and inappropriately used to justify speech limitations."

While Alito's mistake is a common one, it is particularly frustrating because, as a Supreme Court Justice, he should know better. The popularity of this myth poses real threats to free speech. "You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theatre," is often invoked to justify unconstitutional restrictions on speech and to overstate restrictions to the First Amendment. When this myth is adopted by a Supreme Court Justice—no less, the lone dissenter in two recent 8–1 First Amendment cases—it spells danger for our broader cultural understanding of free speech, as well as the values held by those in power.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3660 on: January 29, 2023, 09:30:31 AM »
Acknowledged that OWH's comment was dictum, and acknowledged that the decision in which it was made was overturned, but that does not mean that the respect in which it was, and is, held was overturned.

In this regard, many legal scholars have pointed out that given the complex procedural posture of the case that Marbury v Madison was dictum as well, but if you were to argue that judicial review is not the law of the land you would be laughed out of court.
 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Re: Response to Doug, part 1
« Reply #3661 on: January 29, 2023, 10:15:36 AM »
Looking forward to response part two.  The jury verdict could be wrong and I shouldn't have mentioned it and happy to delete it.  I noticed the quick change to 'yell fire' from falsely doing so.  You can intentionally invite mayhem without consequence?  My point never was about freedom of speech.  It was about escorting people like that out of my association, whether it be my living room, my political party or social media if I owned or ran it.  He can have his speech but not my podium.

The truth would have been a good defense for him.  Just show those 26 are still alive, or maybe that they died of sudden death syndrome pre-vaccine, but I don't think so..

The heart of my point was, what kind of moron thinks Sandy Hook massacre didn't happen, retracts it years later only after he is sued, and what a waste of our limited time it is to care what he thinks or says about anything else.  If this denial story is true, I keep trying to get context, I wish to not be any part of repeating, amplifying or drawing attention to anything about him.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2023, 11:34:07 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3662 on: January 29, 2023, 07:07:21 PM »
Well said.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
left wing media at it again
« Reply #3663 on: January 30, 2023, 06:28:05 AM »
every strict conservative is "far right"

I have never seen them call anyone "far left "

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lake-attacks-gallego-aoc-arizona-031940904.html

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Response to Doug, part 2
« Reply #3664 on: January 30, 2023, 07:57:20 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDnYVPq7Q4c

Start after 5 minutes.

Much like the legal doctrine of "Orange Man Bad", "Alex Jones Bad" means constitutional protections and established legal procedure are irrelevant.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3665 on: January 30, 2023, 08:45:32 AM »
2+ of that three-fer?  Hard pass.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3666 on: January 30, 2023, 12:30:22 PM »
Legal analysis, but I wanted to know what he thought happened at Sandy Hook, what he said and why that's a valid opinion to hold and espouse.  But skip it if that part of it doesn't interest you.




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
big news now is the House committee members
« Reply #3669 on: February 02, 2023, 10:29:46 AM »
I never recall that who or who did not serve on House Committees was ever on  front page news before.

Suddenly who does or does not sit on the House Committees is ***big*** news.

I guarantee most Americans do not even know anything about committees 
but now, alas , since Republicans control the House ...

the narrative ->

MSM puts front page center the narrative that the party of bigots liars and cheats are threatening democracy with ***far right wing *** agenda

the *outrage!!! *

this is unfair
never happened before
disgusting
partisanship  that has NOTHING to do with what the "American people care about".

so annoying
to pick up any MSM news outlet and this is all we see .


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
women steals covid relief to go to resort and get plastic surgery
« Reply #3671 on: February 10, 2023, 10:57:01 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/tenn-woman-used-covid-relief-163715301.html

bad ,

but the real reason for this is headline
is that it was a *TRUMP* resort!!!

how disgusting   :wink:



G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
The MSM will protect Big Pharma at ALL costs!
« Reply #3673 on: February 16, 2023, 07:38:47 AM »
https://twitter.com/laralogan/status/1625994303246827520

It's not global warming causing all the heart attacks?



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3676 on: February 25, 2023, 07:40:03 AM »
I don't understand this whole thing

The LEFT provided info. to the NYT WP or CNN all the time

What does Lindell care?
Like Judicial Watch could he seek a freedom of information release?



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3677 on: February 25, 2023, 10:46:47 AM »
Lindell is in over his head and doesn't realize it.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3678 on: February 25, 2023, 11:21:29 AM »
J6 was the WORST THING EVER in American History!  :cry:

What wouldn't every second be released to the public?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3679 on: February 25, 2023, 11:46:52 AM »
IMHO the team Tucker has assembled for his show sends him out there night after night with a remarkably high level of content.

I'm hoping they can do the work to find The Truth and get it out there for the world to see.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3680 on: February 25, 2023, 11:50:07 AM »
IMHO the team Tucker has assembled for his show sends him out there night after night with a remarkably high level of content.

I'm hoping they can do the work to find The Truth and get it out there for the world to see.

I like Tucker, but the entire library needs to be up on a searchable database, for everyone.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3681 on: February 25, 2023, 11:55:46 AM »
A fair point , , , unless there are legit security issues?

Is this Lindell's argument?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3682 on: February 25, 2023, 11:58:39 AM »
A fair point , , , unless there are legit security issues?

Is this Lindell's argument?

Basically.

Security issues? BS.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3683 on: February 25, 2023, 12:04:44 PM »
If I were responsible for the security of the Capitol building I'm thinking some of the footage would reveal capabilities that I would not want the truly nefarious to know about.

I'm thinking if I were Speaker McCarthy I would not want to be politically vulnerable to such accusations.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3684 on: February 25, 2023, 12:07:03 PM »
If I were responsible for the security of the Capitol building I'm thinking some of the footage would reveal capabilities that I would not want the truly nefarious to know about.

I'm thinking if I were Speaker McCarthy I would not want to be politically vulnerable to such accusations.

They should already assume that is compromised and have reworked the cameras. Those cameras were most likely installed by outside contractors that had to bid under public notice contracts.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
Bill Maher
« Reply #3685 on: March 01, 2023, 08:41:23 AM »
on CNN last night

saw part of it

1) was mostly his own opinions about Democrat + Republicans
    Woke bad - Democrats/liberals good;   MAGA bad - Republicans wrong
2) Jake "the snake" Tapper was interviewing him - and he was his usual incompetent
     Democrat partisan obnoxious self and destroyed any chance I will watch Maher
     if he stays

my take away - CNN is not changing




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy adding conditions on footage to Tucker
« Reply #3690 on: March 02, 2023, 08:37:33 AM »
The deep state flexes it's muscles over McRINO.

Sorry I thought you said the Republican Speaker IS part of the deep state. 

Another day, another beat up on Republicans, down to dirt.  A cheap name call with no point attached to it.

So called conservatives in the past would say Reagan, Newt, Rush and so on should do more to stop Marxism, and now it's wokism, McCarthy and deep statism.

The person who needs to do more to save this country can usually be found in the mirror.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy adding conditions on footage to Tucker
« Reply #3691 on: March 02, 2023, 09:29:30 AM »

Deeds, not words matter. Sorry if I am tired of the endless “Gosh guys, we tried” failure theatre from republicans.

Strange how the left wants to hide the WORST DAY IN AMERICAN HISTORY from the American people, and as usual, with the direct assistance of republicans.



The deep state flexes it's muscles over McRINO.

Sorry I thought you said the Republican Speaker IS part of the deep state. 

Another day, another beat up on Republicans, down to dirt.  A cheap name call with no point attached to it.

So called conservatives in the past would say Reagan, Newt, Rush and so on should do more to stop Marxism, and now it's wokism, McCarthy and deep statism.

The person who needs to do more to save this country can usually be found in the mirror.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18117
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy adding conditions on footage to Tucker
« Reply #3692 on: March 02, 2023, 10:30:40 AM »
The Left wants to destroy every freedom we know and the right doesn't do enough to stop them.

That is not the same thing.

Want them to do more, fight harder?  Elect more of them and elect better ones. 

Some day you'll post YOUR plan. Tell us who would be YOUR leader.  How YOU will know which are good and which will cave when they get to Washington.  How YOU will win supermajorities when you don't have a single one elected yet.  Looks easy from the armchair, speaking of words over deeds.  Undermining those who are trying to save us is easy - and self defeating.

Meanwhile you say leave the blue-run divided states, retreat to the reddest counties of the reddest states and live off the land, out of their reach - without ever asking or noticing how those counties and those states came to be red.  SOMEBODY that came before you did the hard work of securing and preserving the freedom.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues
« Reply #3693 on: March 02, 2023, 12:28:39 PM »
The point about the J6 Tapes could have gone in the Insurrection thread but I posted it here because of the role Tucker plays in this story.

The immediately following comments on all sides can and should be developed on "The Way Forward for the American Creed" thread.

For the record, in that regard having watched his hour on Mark Levin I am seriously impressed with Ron DeSantis. 

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
CNN fast to bottom
« Reply #3694 on: March 03, 2023, 03:10:53 PM »
https://bonginoreport.com/top-stories/more-bad-news-for-cnns-morning-show-featuring-don-lemon

if one subtracts the captive airport viewers it is most likely a lot less !

 :wink:


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
Bannon against Fox
« Reply #3696 on: March 06, 2023, 07:47:35 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
WT: Trump vs. FOX
« Reply #3697 on: March 07, 2023, 06:32:57 AM »
Trump, Fox News feud reshaping 2024 political landscape

Tensions boil over at CPAC after Bannon criticizes Murdoch

BY SETH MCLAUGHLIN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The beef between former President Donald Trump and Fox News is getting ugly and is leaving an indelible mark on the early jockeying in the 2024 presidential race.

Mr. Trump has laid into Rupert Murdoch, chair of Fox Corp., and Trump allies have piled on, accusing the nation’s most-watched news network of selling out, turning its back on the MAGA movement, and trying to tip the scales in favor of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida.

The simmering tensions boiled over at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference outside Washington where former Trump adviser Steve Bannon sparked one of the loudest ovations of the fourday confab after he blasted Mr. Murdoch.

“People were standing on their chairs and saying, ‘[expletive] Fox,’” Mr. Bannon told The Washington Times.

He is among a growing faction in the Trump universe who say Mr. Murdoch, global investment billionaire Ken Griffin and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky are part of a cabal trying to derail Mr. Trump’s reelection bid.

“I am not trying to shut down Fox, but there is zero probability we will allow the rootless cosmopolitan elite that are the Murdochs — these foreigners — to basically say Trump will not return to the White House,” Mr. Bannon said. “It will not happen.”

Mr. Bannon said he is looking into filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing Fox News of giving free campaign contributions to Mr. DeSantis vis-a-vis its coverage.

“It shows such a lack of respect for the audience,” he said.

Fox News did not respond to a request for comment.

Fox News has long been viewed as the home for Republican and conservative viewpoints, much like MSNBC has been the natural habitat for Democratic and liberal voices.

The once-strong bond between Mr. Trump’s political movement and Fox News has been strained since the network called Arizona for President Biden in the 2020 election.

The decision infuriated Mr. Trump and his supporters, most of whom hold the stolen election claims as an article of faith and remain skeptical of Fox News.

Conservative radio host John Fredericks said Fox News has given Mr. Trump’s third bid for president short shrift. He described the relationship between the MAGA movement and Fox News as “tenuous.”

“The fact that they didn’t cover President Trump on one thing he did between his announcement in Mar-a-Lago and his CPAC speech is absolutely despicable,” Mr. Fredericks said.

“Murdoch can do what he wants, I don’t care. We have built a new alternative media,” he said. “If they don’t want to run our stuff, if they want to make believe we don’t exist so that they can be controlled and kneel to woke corporations and Wall Street, that is fine. Their viewership is gonna dry up.”

Fox News, in prior years, had a big presence at CPAC. That was not the case this year. The network pulled out of the event. Media row instead featured an assortment of Trump-inspired networks and talking heads, ranging from Mr. Fredericks to Right Side Broadcasting and Real America’sVoiceNews, which airs Mr. Bannon’s “War Room” show.

Mr. Bannon was smack in the middle of it all. Crowds salivated for the chance to catch him in person and watch him tape “War Room.”

The simmering tensions are playing out amid a legal battle between Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems. The company has brought a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against the network for knowingly promoting false claims that the company was involved in election fraud.

The case appears to be headed to trial.

Mr. Murdoch, in recently released testimony, admitted that he “seriously doubted” the rigged election claims and said, “We thought everything was on the up-and-up.”

The revelations have opened up the network to stiff criticism from both the right and left, including the charge that the decision to air the bogus claims helped fuel the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Mr. Trump has come at it from a different angle. He has said if Mr. Murdoch does not believe the election was stolen, “then he & his group of MAGA Hating Globalist RINOs should get out of the News Business as soon as possible.”

On Monday, Mr. Trump doubled down on his criticism with a 3 a.m. post on Truth Social, his social media platform.

“How does Rupert Murdoch say there was no election fraud when 2000 Mules shows, on government tape, that there were millions of ‘stuffed ballots,’ & Elon Musk released the FBI/Twitter Files, where pollsters say that the silencing of information made a 17% difference in the Vote,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Then there was, of course, FBI/Facebook, another big election integrity fraud costing millions of Votes-& this doesn’t even count all of the many other ways they cheated, or the fact that they avoided State Legislatures?”

The movie “2000 Mules” was produced by conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza who used purported “geotracking” data from cellphone apps to trace people, or mules, allegedly involved with stuffing ballot drop boxes in Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The claims were never substantiated

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69113
    • View Profile
WSJ: The FOX News Lawsuit and the Public Taste for Lies
« Reply #3698 on: March 08, 2023, 09:01:08 AM »
The Fox News Lawsuit and the Public Taste for Lies
The case exposes the dilemmas of ‘post-objectivity’ journalism.
Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. hedcutBy Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.Follow
March 7, 2023 6:04 pm ET


Two years ago, on the subject of the public’s disturbing preference for fictionalized “news,” I doubted the legal merits of voting-machine claims against Fox News but suggested the lawsuits nevertheless “represented a healthy impulse to get the evidence before a forum where evidence still matters.”

Voila. Fox opinion hosts, at least in the one-sided evidence presented so far, are shown to have been privately scathing about Donald Trump’s election claims even as they gave air-time to Trump allies Fox viewers plainly wanted to hear.


The moment isn’t an exact analog to a prominent podcaster admitting the lie about Hunter Biden’s laptop being a Russian plant because he also approved the lie, but it’s close.

It’s pleasant at least to know that Fox opinion hosts, such as Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, had their wits about them on the evidence and the requirements of evidence. If as much attention were paid to revelations about other news outlets’ faulty handling of the Russia-collusion farce, Hunter Biden’s laptop or the FBI’s actions in the 2016 election, we might be getting somewhere now.

Fox can comfort itself that its on-air sources took responsibility for their own allegations, unlike so many collusion stories where anonymous sources were allowed to advance their false claims under the imprimatur of major news organizations.

Fox viewers were also left in no doubt they were hearing a widely criticized, highly questionable, minority viewpoint about the election outcome. Fox’s own news anchors told them so. So did almost every other news outlet.

A question this column has wrestled with more than once: When are the lies of a disreputable and widely discredited figure like Mr. Trump a bigger danger to the republic than lies that receive the near-universal endorsement of the establishment and its institutions?

The moment is bigger than it seems. Harvard’s Martin Kulldorff and Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya have lent their names to a growing call for a Covid commission, also endorsed by this column, albeit for the limited purpose of examining the government’s pandemic messaging, though it may be a distinction without a difference.

All the questions Profs. Kulldorff and Bhattacharya ask could also be asked of the media, starting with the one at the bottom of it all: Why ignore or downplay the reality of mild and asymptomatic spread and its visible corollaries? From this mistake flowed so many misguided, inefficient pandemic actions aimed at protecting the least-at-risk, which almost certainly did more harm than good. From this also flowed so much of the false and manipulative messaging now rightly being criticized, about masks, natural immunity, vaccine risk and benefit, and even the likelihood of dying from Covid.

In one way, I dissent from the critique of our health-care absolutists: The demand for their ministrations bubbled up from below. On Dec. 28, 2020, the New Yorker magazine devoted almost a whole issue to investigating the pandemic—not the pandemic in front of its face, the pandemic of media myth, in which competent government officials somehow can stop a new, easily transmissible, world-wide respiratory virus from spreading.

In an in-house publication of the Fred Hutchison Cancer Center, virologist Jesse Bloom was speaking of the lab-leak hypothesis but his words strike me as having a wider applicability. He noted the strange spectacle of scientists and others caring less about finding the truth than about rooting for “one or the other possibility to be true.”

Yes, and this collapse of respect for evidence is making society stupid. Social media is blamed at least by those who don’t blame Mr. Trump for the lies of his enemies as well as his own. But the mechanism is unspecified. The mechanism, it seems to me, is “operant conditioning,” or the simplest form of learning, the kind that paramecia do, in unconscious response to rewards and punishments in the environment.

Thanks to the very implausibility of the Trump claims, in the crisis at Fox News the unconscious became conscious. Participants aired their cognitive dissonance in anguished internal exchanges that are now part of the public record. The Trump allegations were newsworthy. The audience wanted to hear them. But they were also false. The moment is strikingly reminiscent of the secretly recorded lament four years earlier of a New York Times editor in front of his entire staff about the paper’s failure to deliver the Trump collusion story its readers wanted.

The algorithms guarantee our future won’t be without news sites that try to please their audiences. But the opportunity is obviously present also for news outlets to be a resort and refuge for consumers who want disciplined, rational, evidence-respecting claims that self-respecting reporters and editors have vetted and put their imprimatur on.

The ChatGPT moment, as almost everyone has realized in the past few weeks, makes even more important the survival of news businesses that maintain respect for evidence and standards of evidence.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18349
    • View Profile
we are no smarter than a bunch of paramecia
« Reply #3699 on: March 08, 2023, 10:11:11 AM »
"Yes, and this collapse of respect for evidence is making society stupid. Social media is blamed at least by those who don’t blame Mr. Trump for the lies of his enemies as well as his own. But the mechanism is unspecified. The mechanism, it seems to me, is “operant conditioning,” or the simplest form of learning, the kind that paramecia do, in unconscious response to rewards and punishments in the environment."

scroll down to LEARNING PARAGRAPH:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramecium

 :-o :-o :-o