Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality


https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/10/rumors-x-twitter-musk/680219/?utm_source=msn

"As Musk has drifted to the right, his profile picture now features him in a MAGA hat, the platform he rebranded as X has become the center of a right-wing political culture built upon a fantastical rumor mill.

……The amplification of emotionally manipulative chatter is a familiar issue on social media. What's more disconcerting is that Republican political elites, with Musk now among them, are openly legitimizing what the X rumor mill churns out when it serves their objectives.

….History shows that the weaponization of rumors can lead to devastating consequences, scapegoating individuals, inciting violence, deepening societal divisions, sparking moral panics, and even justifying atrocities.

…..Conservatives have reframed fact checking as a censorship technique by "woke" tech companies and biased journalists.

…..Without a concerted push to defend truth, by leaders, institutions, and the public, the rumor mill will continue to churn, and its distortions will become the foundation of an irreparably divided political landscape. As Hurricane Milton roared across Florida, social-media users were fantasizing, absurdly, about government control of tropical cyclones and making death threats against weather forecasters.

…..Rumors have always circulated, but the decision by Republican politicians and Musk to exploit them has created a problem that's genuinely new. In the modern right wing propaganda landscape, where facts are recast as subjective and any authority outside MAGA is deemed illegitimate, eroding trust in institutions is not an unfortunate side effect, it is the goal. And for now, the result is a niche political reality wherein elites on the right, including the world's richest man, amplify baseless claims without legitimate pushback."

If the mainstream media did their jobs, there would be no reason for people to look elsewhere for news. Based on viewership, the mainstream media is not so mainstream media anymore, especially among younger people. Backed by corporations and in bed with three letter government agencies, and the DNC, the corporate media have become the enemy of the people.

bearister said:

---

Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality

---

So, Doug Emhoff slapped his ex-girlfriend in public. He also impregnated his former nanny.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality

---

So, Doug Emhoff slapped his ex-girlfriend in public. He also impregnated his former nanny.

---

As far as I know, no one is voting for Doug Emhoff, so you can put that issue to rest.

---

As far as I know, no one voted for Kamala to be on the ticket either.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality

---

So, Doug Emhoff slapped his ex-girlfriend in public. He also impregnated his former nanny.

---

As far as I know, no one is voting for Doug Emhoff, so you can put that issue to rest.

---

Did we vote for Jill Biden?

bear2034 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality

---

So, Doug Emhoff slapped his ex-girlfriend in public. He also impregnated his former nanny.

---

51 former intelligence officers signed a letter stating that Doug was only caressing her.

oski003 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rumors on X Are Becoming the Right's New Reality

---

So, Doug Emhoff slapped his ex-girlfriend in public. He also impregnated his former nanny.

---

As far as I know, no one is voting for Doug Emhoff, so you can put that issue to rest.

---

Did we vote for Jill Biden?

---

Doctor Jill Biden.

Didn't you hear? The settlement also stated that Stephanopoulos has to change his name to Snuffaluffugous.

bearister said:

---

ABC just missed tying Fox News by $772,000,000.

---

The award was proportionate to their respective ratings.

philly1121 said:

---

Tell this to 88, 34 and Goggles. They think Glenn is a liberal. LMAO

---

Greenwald is a man of the left to everyone but people who are far left. In his career, he has written for Salon, the Guardian and formed the Intercept. Those are all clearly left publications. Matt Taibbi has a very similar approach.

The reason this is confusing to you is that his primary focus is on civil liberties (think ACLU until the last decade), which used to be axiomatic to the left, but no longer. The far left is totalitarian, anti-free speech, and anti civil liberties in general.

Greenwald has been pretty consistent and will criticize anyone (and any party) he feels violate his principals. That is why he's deserving of being taken seriously.

Goggles i'm not sure you've ever had an original thought. You're a rehearser. A retweeter. No critical thought. Goggles the redundant MAGA.

You champion the Brazil living Greenwald because of his opposition to the Iraq war. He was a critic. A skeptic, if you will, of info from government about the war, the media's lack of a critical view of the war and the lack of Dem oppo of the war. In short, Greenwald framed himself as a skeptic. The problem is, for the past 20 years, Glenn doesn't apply that skepticism equally. Rather than offer a substantive path of discourse against both parties, he insults MSNBC or CNN as "in the bag" but regularly is a guest of the right wing demagogue Tucker Carlson. He applies no equality of his skepticism to Tucker or the Fox News Brigade. He's no centrist and has traded that guise for going "all in" on right wing populism.

And as an aside, Glenn has never regarded himself as a liberal or a progressive. He resigned in a huff from The Intercept because they wouldn't publish an editorial of his which he wrongly accused Hunter Biden of wrongdoing in Ukraine. Something that we all know was bs (see Alexi Smirnov).

philly1121 said:

---

Goggles i'm not sure you've ever had an original thought. You're a rehearser. A retweeter. No critical thought. Goggles the redundant MAGA.

You champion the Brazil living Greenwald because of his opposition to the Iraq war. He was a critic. A skeptic, if you will, of info from government about the war, the media's lack of a critical view of the war and the lack of Dem oppo of the war. In short, Greenwald framed himself as a skeptic. The problem is, for the past 20 years, Glenn doesn't apply that skepticism equally. Rather than offer a substantive path of discourse against both parties, he insults MSNBC or CNN as "in the bag" but regularly is a guest of the right wing demagogue Tucker Carlson. He applies no equality of his skepticism to Tucker or the Fox News Brigade. He's no centrist and has traded that guise for going "all in" on right wing populism.

And as an aside, Glenn has never regarded himself as a liberal or a progressive. He resigned in a huff from The Intercept because they wouldn't publish an editorial of his which he wrongly accused Hunter Biden of wrongdoing in Ukraine. Something that we all know was bs (see Alexi Smirnov).

---

A rehearser? What exactly is that? And you accuse me of not being clear thinking. LMAO.

Greenwald doesn't go on MSNBC or CNN because they won't have him anymore (he used to). He, properly, has said he'll go on channels/podcasts/etc from both sides. Unfortunately, MSNBC and CNN and the rest of the left media really don't tolerate liberal contributors with opposing viewpoints. They will tolerate an occasional conservative, but not a blasphemous liberal.

And, most notably, you continue to discredit yourself in claiming that Hunter Biden did nothing wrong in Ukraine. It's just laughable at this point. Nobody with any credibility claims Hunter did nothing wrong. If you really think that, then please provide an innocent explanation for why he was on Burisma's board. The only question is whether Joe was involved or knew about it.

Greenwald explained by he resigned. You have misrepresented the reason/substance of the article - People should read the full article linked below. For the most part, he was criticizing the media for not asking a lot of very relevant questions to Joe Biden and having a complete double standard on the Biden issues. He was right and the article stands up fine.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored

Aww, you got that right from James Comer's twitter feed. Come on. Originality, please! Why don't you ask him what the status of his investigation is?

I like what Jim Jordan said on Special Counsel David Weiss' investigation on the Bidens. "We're going to investigate the investigation". hilarious.

Meanwhile, barrister probably believes everything on this list

How many of these legacy media lies did you fall for…? pic.twitter.com/lm1TNcBpO3

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) December 16, 2024

bearister said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

If the mainstream media did their jobs, there would be no reason for people to look elsewhere for news. Based on viewership, the mainstream media is not so mainstream media anymore, especially among younger people. Backed by corporations and in bed with three letter government agencies, and the DNC, the corporate media have become the enemy of the people.

---

Only one mainstream media outlet has been proven to be monumental liars, intentional disseminators of misinformation, staffed with on air personalities that joked in emails and text messages* that they knew they were slinging bullsh@it at their intellectually challenged audience and wrote a check for $787,000,000 for telling dirty rotten lies:



*Those on air personalities were real geniuses creating damning evidence which they didn't have the ability to destroy….which they would not have hesitated doing.

---

Back for a second.

So Barrister, did Fox help participate in the cover-up Biden's deteriorating health helping to facilitate a Trump victory?

NBC did a poll and found that Biden and Trump supporters are sharply divided by the media they consume. Those relying on newspapers to get your news are likely to support Harris by a whopping 70 per cent to 21 per cent, and they say whatever their readers want to hear. National network news is still slanted at 55-35. News websites? Plenty of progressive voices there: 49/39.

Then it shifts. Those who rely on social media favoured Trump, 46-42. Cable news watchers prefer Trump, 53-45.
If YouTube or use aggregators like Google (I get my news from Google news) as the primary sources, Trump was preferred over Harris by a wide margin, 55-39.

Voters who rely on the Trump favoring media already knew that Biden was feeble; there are sites that have been pumping out short videos of his every stumble and stammer for years. Newspaper readers don't have to confront video, and were comforted by lying Biden-friendly reporters parroting democratic propaganda, even about his performance in the debate. If newspaper readers were the most prone to pretend about Biden, it was because newspaper writers were the biggest lying propagandists. The New York Times was so embarrassed to be exposed as covering for Biden for years that, post-debate, it published a editorial demanding that he withdraw. The Biden White House clearly succeeded in a massive cover-up, and all those liberal news sources colluded and failed to hold power accountable. The elite media you seem to think is so ethical cost us a legitimate alternative to Trump (even assuming Harris had the goods, she didn't have the time to sell herself), and for that I call BS on any discussion about the media. And yes, I'm angry, and you should be also. Now I'm taking my ball and leaving.