I can't disprove that.

And if you're a q fan

Need I say more.

and don't forget the Jedi mind trick to tell all those poll watchers to go home

I told those guys we could brainstorm this and come up with a narrative that's just as plausible as any of evidence.

you need not but I'm sure you will 🤣

My stated time frame for the deliverables was 20 hours...

20 minutes would likely be enough.

They aren't having it..

I may have come off condescending.

F...

@meglide what are you saying I talked too much or I'm nuts?

perhaps both? ... we're both definitely nuts ... but then again I look at that <#771201221145919499> channel and think I'm not that nuts

right..

It's purposeful conspiracy by media outlets to get clicks...the more nutty the story's drive the people, the more clicks... Engagement...

Yeah... True, @busillis ... What some folks don't always get is that many of these "news" outlets are not trying to lie to us or push a false narrative.

These "news" agencies are not like of the past when they did not need to bring in tons of cash. But now, the "news" is their only product.

Show how do they capitalize on that?

Well... you have to keep people watching and tuned in as much as possible. How do you do that?

Well... once you have your base audience selected you simply feed them "news" that they will find interesting and is presented in a way that confirms the viewers pre-existing world view.

This is done on both sides. CNN is no better than Fox in that regard.

So its not that they are actively trying to deceive. They just know the best way to keep you watching is to approach issues in a way that confirms your world view.

"Yep. I knew it that Biden family is crooked! I am so glad I found this network."
or
"Yep. I knew it Trump is hiding his taxes because of ties to Russia. I am so glad I found this network."

The really bad thing about this is we put ourselves into little bubbles. Not just media bubbles but information bubbles.

Because if your chosen network is not going to show you something that they do not believe is interesting to you or they are unable to spin it in a way that confirms you biases.
As such, we are deprived real news worthy stories because we limit the sources that we trust. So not only do we get a spun version, we ONLY get what they give us.

I disagree with this notion. They actively censor topics that are detrimental to their narrative, have you seen the #CNNtapes?

I think that’s bad but there is a way to do it and still be accurate even though it’s selective

Online media takes the next step and starts just entertaining and being non factual along with being selective

CNN is popular their content must be accurate

To be clear I don't completely disagree with the idea that they have to appeal to their audience for monetary reasons, I just think what I said before is also true

@Dedkraken lol

Yeah but all networks censor things their base would hate

It’s too what degree

That's how the right props up all their media. Popularity > factchecking

You should take hunter bidens conspiracy seriously new york post is popular. How can Fox lie they are the number 1 network

In the case of cnn they seem like they just didn’t lend credence to the “fraud conspiracy” which is fine. It’s if they censor something factual and non nebulous when it becomes a issue

Newsmax tv is beating Fox in ratings

The ceo of newsmax basically said they will push things they don’t know are true

Of course

That's how you win information wars I suppose

Propaganda wars

Ehhh, Propaganda is what you do when you have distribution over a controlled population. Radio, TV, Pamphlets you drop on a city telling them to surrender.

Info is more memetic. Letting it grow organically after the initial plant. Turns out to be WAY more effective.

Too many lawsuits founded on truthiness

Texas lawsuit is comical

COVID-19 vaccine: UK regulators warn people with history of 'significant' allergic reactions not to have Pfizer/BioNTech jab

http://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-vaccine-uk-regulators-warn-people-with-history-of-significant-allergic-reactions-not-to-have-pfizerbiontech-jab-12155916

https://ruqqus.com/+News/post/5l5r/breaking-uk-regulators-have-issued-a

Ahh yes. the medical diagnosis of "significant" medical reactions.

Does this mean someone with a deadly allergy to something means they shouldn't take it? Because that's literally like all my family.

All of which are in the risk groups. lol

My father has a severe reaction to shellfish, my grandmother can die if she takes penicillin, my mother has severe reactions to bee stings.