Media Bias

[pErvinalia]

Maybe she's going to take her client's names to the grave. She's an honourable person..

[Cunt]

Maybe she's going to take her client's names to the grave. She's an honourable person..

Good on her. Can't be a snitch.

Weird how the justice department is fully behind her on that though. Must be good reasons for them to shield a bunch of sex criminals from public scrutiny.

By the way, have you looked up what Roth did at twitter, and what his phd thesis was?

It speaks directly to whether there was a detectable bias at twitter before Mr. Musk fucked everything up for the highly credulous.

[Brian Peacock]

Maybe she's going to take her client's names to the grave. She's an honourable person..

There's a long tradition in holding women to account for the abuse of men. Her prosecution is suppose to draw a line under the matter I think - and she might be wise to keep her secrets, because her gaurds could fall asleep while the security cameras malfunction.

[pErvinalia]

Is that you, Cunt?

[Brian Peacock]

[Cunt]

Maybe she's going to take her client's names to the grave. She's an honourable person..

There's a long tradition in holding women to account for the abuse of men. Her prosecution is suppose to draw a line under the matter I think - and she might be wise to keep her secrets, because her gaurds could fall asleep while the security cameras malfunction.

Her dad taught her well.

[rasetsu]

Elon Musk Becomes First Person In History To Lose $200 Billion

[Cunt]

https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/ ... e-relative

This is one of the gentler pieces of hers. The first one I found was a bit NSFR

I know that sounds hyperbolic. That’s what purveyors of the Biggest Lie in world history count on. It is too titanic, too ridiculous to be believed.

All of their mouthpieces tell you so. They tell you we’re “anti-vaxxers.” They tell you we’re “conspiracy theorists.” They tell you we’re spreading “misinformation.” They tell you we’re “right-wing extremists,” “Deplorables,” and “Trump voters.”

They tell you not to listen to us. They tell you we can’t be trusted. They tell you THEY are your “single source of truth.”

I think what Mr. Musk quipped about NPC's might have been serious.

[Brian Peacock]

Do you believe that media groups got together to lie to you (and everyone) about a stolen election, about how the coronavirus outbreak was under control in Spring 2020, about Ilhan Omar supporting ISIS, about the great replacement, about how the sound of wind turbines caused cancer, and about how it didn't rain on Trumps inauguration day?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Goddam fact-checkers. Dan Bongino and many people are saying that they're really disgusting people. Somebody ought to fact-check them right back, the rotten bastards. Or something. They're clearly biased against conservatives who are fighting to further God's plan and advance the cause of God's people. Any so-called scientific study based on the findings of fact-checkers (PolitiFact and Snopes) is a waste of time.

Sifting through putative news podcasts to determine the level of misinformation and lies in the content they disperse.

'Audible reckoning: How top political podcasters spread unsubstantiated and false claims'

10 prominent podcasters were responsible for sharing the majority of false and misleading content: The 10 podcast series that shared unsubstantiated or false claims at the highest overall rates accounted for more than 60% of all the dataset’s unsubstantiated and false claims. These series, whose hosts lean conservative politically, had a combined reach of more than 28 million followers on Facebook and Twitter as of September 2022.

The Brookings Institute paper linked above is rather lengthy and I have not read it in its entirety. From a leftist source:

'Steven Bannon and Other Conservatives Lie the Most on Their Podcasts, Study Finds'

The study — which transcribed 36,603 podcast episodes from 79 political talk shows released before Jan. 22, 2022 — checked each episode’s transcript for keywords associated with common falsehoods debunked by fact checkers, The New York Times explained.

Researchers found that nearly 20 percent of Bannon’s episodes contained falsehoods, misleading statements, or unsubstantiated claims. The study also found that Conservative podcasters contained these things 11 times more often than liberal podcasters.

The other conservative podcasters found to contain the highest percentage of false, misleading, or unsubstantiated claims included Sean Hannity, Rudy Giuliani, Charlie Kirk, Steven Crowder, Michael Savage, Mark Levin, Daniel Horowitz, and co-hosts Clay Travis and Buck Sexton.

Bannon called the report’s findings a “badge of honor,” stating, “What they call disinformation or misinformation we consider the truth. And time is proving us out.”

[Brian Peacock]

Effects of fact-checking warning labels and social endorsement cues on climate change fake news credibility and engagement on social media

Abstract

Online fake news can have noxious consequences. Social media platforms are experimenting with different interventions to curb fake news' spread, often employing them simultaneously. However, research investigating the interaction of these interventions is limited. Here, we use the heuristic-systematic model of information processing (HSM) as a theoretical framework to jointly test two interventions against fake news that are implemented at scale by social media platforms: (1) adding warning labels from fact checkers to initiate systematic processing and (2) removing social endorsement cues (e.g., engagement counts) to reduce the influence of this heuristic cue. Moreover, we accounted for dispositions previously found to affect a person's response to fake news through motivated reasoning or cognitive style.

An online experiment in Germany (N = 571) confirmed that warning labels reduced the perceived credibility of a fake news post exaggerating the consequences of climate change. Warning labels also lowered the (self-reported) likelihood to amplify fake news.

Removing social endorsement cues did not have an effect. In line with research on motivated reasoning, left-leaning individuals perceived the climate fake news to be more credible and reported a higher likelihood to amplify it. Supporting research on cognitive style, participants with lower educational levels and a less analytic thinking style also reported a higher likelihood of amplification. Elaboration likelihood was associated only with age, involvement, and political leaning, but not affected by warning labels.

Our findings contribute to the mounting evidence for the effectiveness of warning labels while questioning their relevance for systematic processing.

[L'Emmerdeur]

At least one member of this site appears to admire James O'Keefe of Project Veritas. It seems that O'Keefe is going through some things.

'James O’Keefe Is on Paid Leave From Project Veritas'

James O’Keefe, the founder and chairman of Project Veritas, has taken a paid leave from the conservative nonprofit media organization as its board considers whether to remove him from his leadership position, according to current and former employees of the organization.

An internal message sent to Project Veritas employees by the organization’s executive director, Daniel Strack, said that O’Keefe would be taking “a few weeks of well-deserved PTO.” An image of the message was shared by a source familiar with the organization’s internal operations, and its authenticity was confirmed by a current employee. When reached for comment on his personal cell phone, O’Keefe said nothing in response and did not respond to follow-up calls and text messages. Through a Project Veritas spokesman, Strack later released a statement on behalf of the organization. “Like all newsrooms at this stage, the Project Veritas Board of Directors and Management are constantly evaluating what the best path forward is for the organization,” the statement read in part. It did not directly address questions about O’Keefe’s employment status. “There are 65+ employees at Project Veritas dedicated to continuing the mission to expose corruption, dishonesty, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions,” the statement read. “To our supporters: We hear you, we care about you, and we will never give up.”

In some of the right wing fever swamps the theory is that DeSantis operatives are behind this. Noting that the source below is notorious for inaccurate information, to put it mildly.

'Hostile Takeover of Project Veritas Seeking to Remove James O’Keefe – DeSantis Aligned Operatives Spearheading Effort for Removal'

Word first broke on the Twitter last night about a board coup inside the Project Veritas organization led by Matt Tyrmand, a rabid advocate for Ron DeSantis and part of the 2024 influence operation.

According to the leaked information, Matt Tyrmand organized a six-hour confrontation session against Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe, culminating in a decision to put O’Keefe on leave.

“The board held a six-and-a-half-hour struggle session vs James where they subjected him to constant derision and insults. At the insistence of Tyrmand, O’Hara, and Hinckley; “about ten employees aired their grievances about James, which essentially boiled down to him being a tough boss to work for. At the end of this six-hour struggle session, Tyrmand and fellow board member John Garvey put him on leave and stripped him of all authority.”

...

Remember, big corporate donors like the Koch Donor Trust are attached to Project Veritas and simultaneously attached to Ron DeSantis. This could be where DeSantis operative Matt Tyrmand connects the issues between Big donors (Koch), Big Pharma (Pfizer) and Big Club (DeSantis) motives.

However, Occam’s Razor could also apply in that an untrustworthy, backstabbing dirtbag and ankle biter like Matt Tyrmand just happens to find a natural ideological alignment with Team DeSantis.

Money at this scale, with the political overlay and stakes high, is a powerfully corrupting combination. However, if the board at Project Veritas thinks they can oust James O’Keefe and still remain viable, they are sadly mistaken. There is no Project Veritas without James O’Keefe.

[Tero]

Fox News
Carlson was worried about Fox stock prices, his viewers were just sheep

Tucker Carlson immediately after the elections: “The outcome of our presidential election was seized from the hands of voters, where of course it rightly belongs, and now resides in the control of lawyers and courts and highly partisan, clearly corrupt, big city bureaucrats. So no matter what happens next, that is a tragedy. Many Americans will never again accept the results of a presidential election.”
What Tucker really thought about stolen elections according to Court findings: “Sydney Powell is lying,” Tucker Carlson said in a text message to his producer. Meanwhile Laura Ingraham said in a message to Carlson: “Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy.”
Tucker was right when he called his viewers good people but DUMB… as they believe his own bullshit
“It’s unbelievably offensive to me. Our viewers are good people and they believe it,” Carlson responded, according to court papers. These messages came in the weeks following the election.

[Tero]

Fox was the first cable news network to project Biden's victory in Arizona, prompting a slew of angry phone calls and texts from people in Trump's camp.

"We worked really hard to build what we have," Carlson texted his producer, Alex Pfeiffer, on November 5, 2020, according to the filing. "Those fuckers are destroying our credibility. It enrages me."

Carlson added that he had spoken with fellow primetime commentators Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity minutes earlier and that they were "highly upset."

"At this point we're getting hurt no matter what," he wrote, according to the filing.

Pfeiffer replied that "many on 'our side' are being reckless demagogues right now."

"Of course they are," Carlson wrote. "We're not going to follow them." He went on to say that Trump was good at "destroying things. He's the undisputed world champion of that. He could easily destroy us if we play it wrong."
Dominion became a focal point for Trumpworld's election-related conspiracy theories shortly after Election Day 2020. "By November 11, Sean Hannity recognized the critical role the Dominion fraud narrative would play in winning back viewers," Thursday's filing said.

"In one week and one debate they destroyed a brand that took 25 years to build and the damage is incalculable," Hannity told Carlson and Ingraham on November 12, a week after the Arizona call.

"It's vandalism," Carlson replied, according to the filing.

The host also grew angry when a Fox News reporter fact-checked a Trump tweet accusing Dominion of election fraud.

The reporter, Jacqui Heinrich, wrote in response to Trump's tweet that top election officials had determined "there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."

Carlson dropped Heinrich's tweet into a group chat with Ingraham and Hannity, per the filing, and told Hannity: "Please get her fired. Seriously....What the fuck? I'm actually shocked...It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It's measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke."

One of Ingraham's producers, Tommy Firth, struck a more blunt tone.

"This dominion shit is going to give me a fucking aneurysm — as many times as I've told Laura it's bs, she sees shit posters and trump tweeting about it," Firth wrote to a Ron Mitchell, a Fox executive overseeing Ingraham's show, according to a partially redacted text featured in the filing.

"This is the Bill Gates/microchip angle to voter fraud," Mitchell replied. Later that day, he circled back with Firth, writing, "How's it going [with] the kooks?"

In a statement, a Fox News spokesperson said Dominion's case is a threat to free speech, and that the company misrepresented the evidence it collected.

"Dominion has mischaracterized the record, cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context, and spilled considerable ink on facts that are irrelevant under black-letter principles of defamation law," the spokesperson said.

"As a result of the false accusations broadcast by Fox into millions of American homes, Dominion has suffered unprecedented harm and its employees' lives have been put in danger," Dominion's attorneys wrote in the lawsuit.

"Fox took a small flame and turned it into a forest fire," Dominion's lawsuit said.

https://www.businessinsider.com/tucker- ... uit-2023-2

[Brian Peacock]

"At this point we're getting hurt no matter what."

Just noting the use of the Royal 'we' there, and how the complaints of Tucker et al frames them as an actual part/extension of the Trump administration.