We're at a point, I think, where being cynical about what you see in the media is just a survival skill. The idea that any of the big players are just there to help you make informed decisions―as opposed to a particular decision, regardless of whether it's informed or not―doesn't pass the laugh test.
Fact-checkers are a case in point. When the first (technically) independent fact-checking organizations first appeared, they seemed harmless, maybe even benevolent. Someone was out there investigating claims and making dispassionate verdicts as to their legitimacy. But it turned out that wasn't their purpose at all. The fact-checkers were amassing power they could later use, abuse, and auction off.
The story that Siegel tells about BMJ and their Ventavia/Pfizer exposé is darkly hilarious, showing how these people never neglect to have someone else to blame. And the Hunter Biden picture in Jen Psaki's tweet is pure Uncanny Valley. If you've seen unfiltered photos of him you know his teeth would be considered dodgy even if he lived in England.
2 comments:
That was a great article. Jer read most of it to me this morning while I was having breakfast and later I read much of it over again. He makes some very valid points about how information is manipulated nowadays in service of the powers currently in control of what the public is allowed to know. Unfortunately for them they really aren't very good at the job and even more unfotunately for us many people don't seem particularly interested.
The latest and even more egregious lie has been the cover up of the covid narrative, most especially the serious failure of the 'vaccines'. Eveyone is supposed to forget all that now as we're expected to focus on hating Russia.
Remember when Snopes evaluated nothing much more than urban rumors? When we heard they were going to be recognized as official government fact checkers I thought that must surely be one of the jokes they'd debunk. But no, whereas once there were just a few paid fact checkers, now there are hundreds and, rather than more real information, what we get from the mainstream is it doesn't matter what the 'facts' are, only 'whose side are you on?'
Jer reminded me of a remark he read earlier in the week: We didn't have fact checkers until the truth began to emerge.
I'm sure you're right about Hunter Biden's teeth.
I'm glad both of you liked the article. Yeah, I'd say we were in for it once the fact checkers decided their work wasn't just for Trivial Pursuit games and bar bets, that they actually wanted to make a difference in the world. From there it was a short leap to trying to "correct" into a particular ideological agenda. As a result I think much more kindly on people who don't bother to keep up on current events. How much could they gain from these sources?
The Russia coverage has been something else. It's the kind of thing that merits some skepticism, but there aren't enough skeptics. As for COVID, it looks like we're supposed to forget now, but there needs to be a reckoning.
The need to keep coming up with content, to publish at least a dozen pieces per month just to break even, has led to "journalism" without substance becoming prevalent. Fact checking services have fallen right in line with that, almost as if that was the intent all along.
That's a good quote that Jerry unearthed.
It's probably true that Hunter has gotten them capped, for now. Still, he's gotten himself into remarkably rough shape at times.
Post a Comment