"Independant journalist" means right-wing liar
Christ, I just found out somebody I thought was reasonable and sensible follows---and believes blatant rightwing liar Andy Ngo. You know, the guy who edits out the parts of videos that shows the peole he calls "victims" attack the people he calls "attackers."
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/andy-ngo-million-maga-march-video/
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/andy-ngo-fake-articles/
https://theintercept.com/2021/05/13/riot-squad-right-wing-video-journalists-black-lives-matter-antifa/
https://www.salon.com/2019/08/28/right-wing-journalist-andy-ngo-outed-video-shows-him-hanging-out-with-far-right-hate-group/
He lied about Trumpies being "attacked." He lied about himself attacked. He concealedworking with Proud Boys.
In every case, he makes a deceitful claim about the evils of liberals. Then, the nextday, the actualunedited videos come out, where the "victim" turns out to have been the attacker.
He invented fake reporters who inturn wrote fake stories.
In every case, the media runs with it. Either the correction gets the small print treatment, or they use, "But some critics say...." which subtly paints the actial truth tellers as having a different opinion.
Also, nobody points out, if you're deliberately falsifying supposed evidence, it"s not an opinion. It discredits YOU and the beliefs you're pushing.
Reminds me of the anti vaxx genius who was at some kind of medical specialty school, and she decided to do her thesis on how vaxxes cause autism, Trumpism, priapism, male pattern baldness, reduce your height by six inches, and so on.....but the school insisted that only peer-reviewed studies. So she posted on an anti-vaxx board, rather plaintively, that all the peer-reviewed studies proved that vaccinations worked. Could anybody point her at .......peer-reviewed studies that proved she was right and the whole world was wrong?
This is the point at which a sensible person might be tempted to think, "Perhaps I am wrong," ----much the way people moved on from, "Witches ruined my crops," to, "Perhaps I shouldn't feetilize my fields with table salt because u/trumpisgod24 said it worked!
Nah, it's safer to keep doing stupid shit and believing proven liars because......because.....then you won't learn anything. But most important you won't have to admit you were....mistaken.
Drill sgts have a justified rep for yelling at people who do stupid shit, but the funny thing is, if you say, "Hey, drill sgt., I'm just not getting the hang os this. What am I doing wrong?" the drill usually responds, "Okay, Private, let's see what's going on." Sure doesn't FEEL like you're stupid. In fact, it feels like the fastest way to fix an issue.
For the "independant" (rightwing) journalists, it's not adapting to new facts, new angles, or new discoveries that's the issue. It's because they think it's YOUR fault you have to lie. It SHOULD be true that this is what their hero is the first one
rather than the second one.
The purveyers of these lies know lying sells. The buyers, though, they want their lies to keep them safe, that've been conned by a guy who hates them. That's dangerous.
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/andy-ngo-million-maga-march-video/
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/andy-ngo-fake-articles/
https://theintercept.com/2021/05/13/riot-squad-right-wing-video-journalists-black-lives-matter-antifa/
https://www.salon.com/2019/08/28/right-wing-journalist-andy-ngo-outed-video-shows-him-hanging-out-with-far-right-hate-group/
He lied about Trumpies being "attacked." He lied about himself attacked. He concealedworking with Proud Boys.
In every case, he makes a deceitful claim about the evils of liberals. Then, the nextday, the actualunedited videos come out, where the "victim" turns out to have been the attacker.
He invented fake reporters who inturn wrote fake stories.
In every case, the media runs with it. Either the correction gets the small print treatment, or they use, "But some critics say...." which subtly paints the actial truth tellers as having a different opinion.
Also, nobody points out, if you're deliberately falsifying supposed evidence, it"s not an opinion. It discredits YOU and the beliefs you're pushing.
Reminds me of the anti vaxx genius who was at some kind of medical specialty school, and she decided to do her thesis on how vaxxes cause autism, Trumpism, priapism, male pattern baldness, reduce your height by six inches, and so on.....but the school insisted that only peer-reviewed studies. So she posted on an anti-vaxx board, rather plaintively, that all the peer-reviewed studies proved that vaccinations worked. Could anybody point her at .......peer-reviewed studies that proved she was right and the whole world was wrong?
This is the point at which a sensible person might be tempted to think, "Perhaps I am wrong," ----much the way people moved on from, "Witches ruined my crops," to, "Perhaps I shouldn't feetilize my fields with table salt because u/trumpisgod24 said it worked!
Nah, it's safer to keep doing stupid shit and believing proven liars because......because.....then you won't learn anything. But most important you won't have to admit you were....mistaken.
Drill sgts have a justified rep for yelling at people who do stupid shit, but the funny thing is, if you say, "Hey, drill sgt., I'm just not getting the hang os this. What am I doing wrong?" the drill usually responds, "Okay, Private, let's see what's going on." Sure doesn't FEEL like you're stupid. In fact, it feels like the fastest way to fix an issue.
For the "independant" (rightwing) journalists, it's not adapting to new facts, new angles, or new discoveries that's the issue. It's because they think it's YOUR fault you have to lie. It SHOULD be true that this is what their hero is the first one
rather than the second one. The purveyers of these lies know lying sells. The buyers, though, they want their lies to keep them safe, that've been conned by a guy who hates them. That's dangerous.