snicksnak

The Alex Jones and Tim Dillon episode is one of the best ones ever, very sad they pulled it, at least it's still on youtube (for now).

always pay attention who you hire, especially in HR. Woke and activist HR hires woke and activist people, woke and activist people will cause you trouble and can wreck your whole ship. This is true for every industry but especially for media, just look what happened to the once so prestigious news outlets, all taken hostage.

the same people probably also find reading Kant offensive

It's also a successful tactic, sadly, to just call everyone a racist, the worst thing you can call someone nowadays, and hope they cave. I'm simply not having it and will never engage in something like that.

This trope is everywhere now. I see this so often now where high profile substack writers are constantly being smeared as transphobic. It's a tactic, and defense and offense strategy and I'm tired of it. Can't take anyone serious anymore how writes something like that.

yeah, that bothered me too. If it's a pseudoscience then why should I care. I hate it when such campaigns with very concrete objectives try to drag everything possible into them. This inevitably muddies the water and leads to semantic overload, where everything is racist.

This behaviour is normalized for a while, the wall street journal wasn't an outlier back then, but now it seems to be also expected when working for big media outlets, just look at the recent Georgia debacle. Activists disguised as journalists pressure companies to act in their favour or they will throw a fit.

yeah, there is whole army of those brave speech police officers out there

Of course this will get weaponized, if it isn't already.

We've seen time and time again that a vile old tweet in the wrong hands can be very powerful, it's a ticking time bomb. Think 5 or even 10+ years down the road, some of the kids who are edgy on twitter today might go in to politics or hold some other high level position.

I don't think the current climate is going to cool down anytime soon, but maybe something like this will either lead to mutually assured destruction or, what I'm hoping for, old tweets losing their power in the long run.

> start discussing how we elect the president of our country

lmao

In general, but the risk-reward ration is now way off, as the author of the article mentions, so why risk it if you potentially face harsh repercussions.

I think it's now essentially a risk-reward decision, like the author said. And the potential risk of being ousted after being accused of something weighs very high.

This trend isn't going away anytime soon, In fact I think it's just ramping up and is accelerating, especially with the racism narrative the main stream media outlets started to heavily push ~2 years ago and the big identity movement. It will continue until there is consensus, that this climate is bad, for everyone involved. I don't see that happen anytime soon, the cancelations will continue until moral improves.

> I use social media for information, not to be turned into a money-making asset for those I follow.

can you describe what you use as sources of information on twitter? Can't be any traditional media outlets because they also want you to pay.

Pretty wild list of misrepresentations you have there, your points about Greenwald are downright slanderous.

> Greenwald More Recently has been on shows of hard right people like Tucker Carlson

He goes on his show because the other outlets are not interested in his topics and therefor won't have him on, probably because they are too busy spouting conspiracy theories about russia. He always says this: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-greenwald-defends-going-on...

> Intercept because they refused to publish conspiracy theories about Joe Biden right before the 2020 election

That's a news worthy story, especially because they did not deny it, which is basically admitting it. They censored the whole story and even lock the new york post out of their twitter account for reporting on it.

> Here he basically says January 6 was a bunch of peaceful protestors misrepresented as violent,

That's not what the article is about, it's about how the media pushed fake news about the event, most egregiously the death of the officer.

> And here he is suggesting vote counting misconducts

again that's not what the article is about, it's about the US inability to count the votes, which takes literally months.

> And here he says you know who the "actual fascist" are? Facebook and Joe Biden

I disagree, He just points out that how the Silicon Valley - Biden/Harris axis will pursue down the path of censorship. I think this was a correct analysis, just watch friday's hearing.

> "don't trust the mainstream media, Trump is amazing"

the former is true, the latter couldn't be further from the truth.

How come a link to REUTERS article, with the exact headline is flagged?

> Only the policeman and the shot women are indicative of anything coup-like.

We still don't know what was the Officer's cause of death. But after weeks of fake news stories about him being beaten to death with a fire extinguisher, this probably doesn't matter. Also that the "Proud boys organized and coordinated groups with zip ties" is an additional misleading point. Those arrested for possessing zip ties, didn't bring them to capitol hill, they picked them up there after the law enforcement dropped them, the prosecution has admitted this itself.

Assange is in prison, possibly for life for the crime of making US war crimes public.

Greenwald has 24/7 protection because his recent reporting exposed the corruption in Balsonaro's administration and lead to Lula being freed from prison.

All the journalists who advocate censorship of things they don't like and engage in smear campaigns have never broken or reported on anything meaningful and probably never will. Many of them probably think that Assange deserves to be extradited and charged, even though that is a direct attack on their profession.

That the government is trying to expand censorship and remove things it doesn't like is something I expect, of course, even if the extent of it surprises and deeply appals me. For me personally, however, it's the members of the cathedral, who are fomenting this wave of censorship and making it their mission to slander and de-platform things they don't like, who I deeply detest and think are the real villains here.

The changes are pretty ridiculous [1], apparently the gobernment's devs kept deliberately renaming a specific header by adding and increasing a number at the end, from `xsrf-token` up to `xsrf-token11` [0], clearly only with the intend to break their rival free market app.

[0] https://twitter.com/oppnaskolplatt/status/137505230118290637...

[1] https://github.com/kolplattformen/embedded-api/commit/b61122...

i'm going out on a limb here and __speculating__ it's the identity of this person to fulfill some kind of quota, I can't explain it otherwise.

Jeez, that's disgusting and concerning to say the least.

Wonder if this is another case of reddit admins went rogue or even sanctioned by reddit.

Can we call it the chinese variant then? Because we do that with the new mutations: the brazilian variant, british variant, south african variant

> I don't want the tactics of Kim Kardashian to be the model of a future journalist.

Most mayor news outlets (including NYT) run branded/sponsored content. I doubt that you will see that on substack.

Assuming this will happen, would this make Musk the first trillionaire?

And who checks the fact checkers? Just 20 years ago the news media landscape was very different, the outlets had so much power, so much in fact, that they played a vital role in convincing the american public to go war. Totally unchecked. Now the lost their monopoly and therewith their power and they don't like it.

can't wait for his testimony before congress tomorrow about saving the free and diverse press.

It is amazing how journalists from mayor outlets and even institutions have so much contempt for independent substack journalists. They think it's beneath them because somehow only working for those outlets gives their reporting legitimacy and a form of entitlement to publish therefor they try to demonize substack and delegitimize its writers because they are independent. I saw it being labeled as "onlyfans for journalists". That's mostly coming from mediocre journalists who probably secretly envy substack writers for their huge profile.

Matt Taibbi recently wrote a piece about it that's worth reading https://taibbi.substack.com/p/in-defense-of-substack

Is this really per transaction or per block?

Everytime i read "quantitative easing" I chuckle, because this thing is stuck in my head https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k