patrick.net

"Fact Checkers" now disappear videos of Nurses and MDs talking about seeing vaccinations lead to heart problems, and non-reporting to VAERS, on the grounds their professional candid observations are misleading misinformation.

MisdemeanorRebellionNoCoupForYou says

"Fact Checkers" now disappear videos of Nurses and MDs talking about seeing vaccinations lead to heart problems, and non-reporting to VAERS, on the grounds their professional candid observations are misleading misinformation.

Of course they do! It not only 1)Contradicts the Narrative, 2)casts aspersions on the holy vax, but it also 3)makes Democrats feel uncomfortable with the choices they’ve made!
That sort of shit is going to get censored EVERY fucking time.

After all, the oligarch owned media has already completely be-clowned themselves in shameless pandering to the wokesters and Libtards on the Left. The last thing they want is a disruption in the culling process of their intended victims at the last minute!
Why do you think they came down so hard on Nikki Minaj? Bitch was off the reservation and threatening to wake up some sleeping Libtards to turn them away from the holy vaccine!

MisdemeanorRebellionNoCoupForYou says

"Fact Checkers" now disappear videos of Nurses and MDs talking about seeing vaccinations lead to heart problems, and non-reporting to VAERS, on the grounds their professional candid observations are misleading misinformation.

Repost the videos here and to other sites before they get deleted.

MisdemeanorRebellionNoCoupForYou says

"Fact Checkers" now disappear videos of Nurses and MDs talking about seeing vaccinations lead to heart problems, and non-reporting to VAERS, on the grounds their professional candid observations are misleading misinformation.

I can archive nearly any video.

I'll setup something this weekend (if I have time) to try to handle everything.

"Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving."

https://nitter.net/MarceloPLima/status/1441867044757061636?s=20

Marcelo P. Lima
@MarceloPLima
Sep 25
This blew my mind: The New York Times printed Nazi propaganda that Poland had invaded Germany, and the journalist who wrote this won a Pulitzer Prize for his efforts.

Maybe US journalism has been dead a very long time.

Patrick says

This blew my mind: The New York Times printed Nazi propaganda that Poland had invaded Germany,

Well, after all, Poland did annex a huge chunk of Nazi Germany post war.

HeadSet says

Patrick says

This blew my mind: The New York Times printed Nazi propaganda that Poland had invaded Germany,

Well, after all, Poland did annex a huge chunk of Nazi Germany post war.

Yeah, 6 years and one world war later, but who's counting.. . =))

https://outsidevoices.substack.com/p/the-nyts-partisan-tale-about-covid?token=patrick.net

The NYT's Partisan Tale about COVID and the Unvaccinated is Rife with Sloppy Data Analysis
The Times' piece on "Red Covid" obscures the reality of the pandemic and manipulates data in favor of a self-congratulatory liberalism.
Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Beckham

kitten corner: kate sheppard
gatito bueno 7 hr ago
69
excuse me miss kate, i am just a kitten and not a big important huffpo senior national editor like you, but i think maybe you have misdiagnosed this.

what you’re feeling is not probably rage.

try asking some actual humans how they all feel about people like you and what you have done to the world for the last 18 months in your pseudoscientific virtue signaling side quest to shore up failing ratings and failed political philosophies.

ask some kids who missed school and parents who lost lives and livelihoods.

i think THEN maybe you’ll understand what rage is.

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/kitten-corner-kate-sheppard/comments

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/blame-legacy-media-not-facebook-disinformation/

Now, a whistleblower has landed on the scene, buoyed by a powerful Democratic PR firm led by former Obama alum Bill Burton. A wave of media attention has crested that’s meant to once again put Facebook in the regulatory crosshairs and demand more censorship from what’s deemed to be dangerous and influential ‘misinformation’. Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan has even called for a new government agency to oversee how information on Facebook is shared and disseminated.

Of course, those like Sullivan want the public at large to believe that they are journalistic warriors interested only in truth and accuracy. That is false. Facebook, as it pertains to traditional legacy news outlets like the Washington Post and CNN, is a competitor, nothing more. And every hit piece they run against the social media giant should be viewed through that lens.

The legacy media views Facebook as having stolen their audience away from them. They think doing away with user-based news feeds and content sharing will put the flow of information back into their hands, where it belongs. They have so far been successful at pressuring social media platforms like Jack Dorsey’s Twitter into complying with their demands. Facebook, however, has stood up to their counter-narrative and arguments for censorship, and must therefore be dealt with.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of Facebook and where it derives its power from. Facebook’s power comes from its user base — almost three billion people worldwide. Whereas CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post draw their power from advertisers and corporate influence. This was the main reason that audiences fled these outlets to begin with. The legacy media’s stubborn refusal to look inward at their own industry is another reason why viewers and subscribers have abandoned them.

There is no clearer example of this dynamic than the events that transpired in Del Rio, Texas, on the southern border just last week. Journalists spread the falsehood that border agents used whips to deter migrants from crossing into the country. This ‘story’ made it all the way to the White House press briefing room and even to the President himself. It triggered a supposed investigation into the Department of Homeland Security, while the agents seen in the photographs and on video were reassigned.

The photographer later said on record that no whipping of migrants had occurred. Video footage showed no such thing. It didn’t matter. Few news outlets issued corrections, apologized for spreading misinformation, and promised to do better. No congressional hearings will be held into how this dangerous misinformation spread. No blue check-verified journalist on Twitter will be held accountable for his role in spreading the false story. There will be no calls for government oversight of the New York Times to prevent such misinformation from spreading.

Robert W Malone, MD
@RWMaloneMD
4h
The real problem here is the damn press and the internet giants. The press and these tech players act to manufacture and reinforce "consensus" around selected and approved narratives. And then this is being weaponized to attack dissenters including highly qualified physicians.

https://www.brighteon.com/c9459663-6baf-4f01-ab29-765d2fe7d078

Can We Really Trust Vaccine Fact Checkers?

Maybe this was posted before, but it's good.

After weeks of explaining there was no Fake White House set, Factcheckers grudgingly admit it's a set, but it's only on the other side of the White House, which somehow makes it more ... explicable?

https://nypost.com/2021/10/07/president-biden-mocked-over-fake-white-house-set/

How can we tell where it really is? I don't think we can.

I think Steven Miller and Peter Navarro have said they've been in the room many times, it's a building next to the White House.

The rumor is that the WH is basically run by Klain, Jarrett, and Obama (remotely by consultation), and Biden is pretty much exiled out of the building.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-york-times-massive-correction-covid-hospitalizations-children

The New York Times issued a massive correction Thursday after the liberal newspaper severely misreported the number of COVID hospitalities among children in the United States by more than 800,000.

A report headlined "A New Vaccine Strategy for Children: Just One Dose, for Now," by science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli, was peppered with errors before major changes were made to the story. The Times initially reported "nearly 900,000 children have been hospitalized" with COVID since the pandemic began, when the factual data in the now-corrected version is that "more than 63,000 children were hospitalized with Covid-19 from August 2020 to October 2021."

So now we have Fox News kicking the NYT's pants with the truth.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Zinovyev

A western citizen is being brainwashed much more than a soviet citizen ever was during the era of communist propaganda. In ideology, the main thing is not the ideas, but rather the mechanisms of their distribution. The might of the Western media, for example, is incomparably greater than that of the propaganda mechanisms of the Vatican when it was at the zenith of its power. And it is not only the cinema, literature, philosophy – all the levers of influence and mechanisms used in the promulgation of culture, in its broadest sense, work in this direction. At the slightest impulse all who work in this area respond with such consistency that it is hard not to think that all orders come from a single source of power.
As quoted in Alexander Zinoviev on Stalin and the dissolution of the USSR

And this from a guy who died in 2006.

https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bee-presents-the-official-mainstream-media-translator

16 Common Phrases In The News And What They Actually Mean

As everyone knows, the news media knows what's best for us and they always tell the truth. The only problem is that they use really big and complicated words that we simple folk just don't understand. How will you ever keep up? Well, don't worry! We prepared this special translation guide just for you, so the next time you're watching the news you'll be able to follow along!

1) "Debunked conspiracy theory" = a completely factual event that is 100% true and we don't like it

2) "This is dangerous misinformation" = we don't really agree with it but people are still sharing it

3) "Farm animal bacterial infection treatment" = penicillin

4) "Conservative panelist" = guy who once voted for Ronald Reagan, possibly by mistake

5) "Super-spreader event" = gatherings of people we don't like

6) "This is the end of democracy" = Trump said a thing

7) "Settled science" = a non-reviewed study by a possibly fictitious organization that just came out this morning

8) "Widespread outrage" = 3 people on Twitter got mad

9) "Racist statements" = literally means nothing

10) "Informal gathering of like-minded people that fosters a sense of camaraderie and community among friends and neighbors" = bread lines

11) "Zero" = anywhere from zero to several trillion

12) "Republicans pounce" = uh oh... a Democrat raped someone

13) "Mostly peaceful" = it was hyper-violent but we agree with it

14) "Racist dog whistle" = a super-secret whistle that only racists can hear and only we heard it

15) "Anonymous sources" = we totally made this up

16) "This is an apple" = this is a banana

https://notthebee.com/article/wapo-bread-lines-arent-so-bad

WaPo: Bread Lines Aren't So Bad, Puny Citizens 🤡

Joel Abbott

Oct 19th, 2021 1:56 pm
What the heck kind of article is this?

Patrick says

16 Common Phrases In The News And What They Actually Mean

Brilliant List.

17) "White Fragility" - Doomed Sinners without the Grace of POC who deny their Original Whiteness Sin of Racism.

https://notthebee.com/article/they-arent-even-trying-to-hide-it-anymore

Yes, they're out and bold, and that's a good thing.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/whipping-up-a-crisis-border/

The wall between journalism and activism is badly corroded. Increasingly, journalists — particularly younger ones — see themselves as serving an ideological mission. I often think back to a late-2020 New York magazine article by Reeves Wiedeman about how this conflict has played out within the Times. During the paper’s internal brouhaha over a controversial op-ed piece the talented journalist and commentator Liz Bruenig uploaded a PDF of a John Rawls essay and argued to her colleagues in an online staff forum that it raised philosophically difficult questions about liberalism that require serious thought.

‘Philosophy schmosiphy,’ responded a researcher, whose avatar was the logo for the hamburger chain Jack in the Box. ‘We’re at a barricades moment in our history. You decide: which side are you on?’ Bruenig was subsequently poached by the Atlantic. I have no inside knowledge but I suspect there is a connection between this moment and her departure.

I can’t say for sure why The Daily botched the whip issue. I can say that ‘which side are you on?’ thinking is endemic in journalism right now, and it rears its head most perniciously when the ideological stakes are high. ‘Are we going to include that whipping thing because everyone says it’s true, or are we going to fact-check it?’

Who wants to be seen, in a business dominated by liberals, as the journalist who doesn’t take racism seriously, and ‘downplays’ the horror that everyone thinks they’ve seen? I’d offer a different version of Mr Jack in the Box’s Manichaean choice: are you an activist or a journalist? Which side are you on?

Bill Who?

Some "journalists" these days actually are robots:

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/miami-herald-robot-writes-real-estate-stories-13219683

LOL!!!

Patrick says

Some "journalists" these days actually are robots:

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/miami-herald-robot-writes-real-estate-stories-13219683

Haha, good luck trying to feed in false information to an AI and expect it to work properly. It doesn't matter much anyhow, nobody reads papers.

Patrick says

Some "journalists" these days actually are robots:

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/miami-herald-robot-writes-real-estate-stories-13219683

There are some APIs available to generate and publish articles on any topic in real time. I know someone who did it for some time. It looks like a real news paper and showed up at google news but far below the stack. All are generated including journalist pictures, names and content. The content generator needs some hints like sample content and bias etc. Its hard to believe the look and feel like any other major "news" paper.