Excellent investigation into the far-right, far-out conspiracy culture. I would love to hear your take on Naomi Klein's latest, "Doppelganger", her own deep dive into what she calls the "Mirror World," so perfectly exemplified by X22. Also "Misbelief" by Dan Ariely, which I'll be tackling next. We need ro keep shining the spotlight on the conspiracists- and also understand better what makes people go down these rabbit holes.
I don't think this is (far) off-topic. People start looking for "alternative news" when they suspect that the professional news is missing things, skipping topics. I was just about to make a daily blog post:
..about WHY people wander off the range, into the alt-news. I had expected an Al-Jazeera story of Dec 13 to move up to more-seen news sites the next day or so, as others checked out the story. (The story is just an accusation: a bunch of bodies, Palestinians screaming they were shot point-blank, even killed "execution style".) Al-Jaz did not have the IDF denial comment that I'm sure is inevitable.
But now, as my post notes, it has gotten to a dozen news sites, most of them only read by brown people outside 'the West'.
Why wouldn't major news media carry it? This is what drives people to imagine conspiracies and bias and all that. (I don't, because too many are not carrying it. Too big for coinspiracy.)
Is is just that the IDF can shut down a story for many days, not just two, by simply refusing to comment so that the Times/Post/etc can't report both sides?
I think there are good reasons why you'd either not match that story or at least take your time doing so — eyewitness accounts in war are notoriously unreliable, Western crews can't access those witnesses, al-Jazeera is not fully independent anymore, etc. And I think there's some bad ones, yeah: Nobody wants to repeat the mistake of the al-Ahli hospital bombing and get swarmed by the various groups that dedicate themselves to calling out "anti-Israel bias" in the media.
For what it's worth, I don't even see this story getting much traction outside of a few sites. Not even the pro-Hamas channels I follow — of which there are quite a few, and they are explicitly supportive or aligned with the leadership — are sharing this, aside from one post from Wednesday.
It's something I'll keep an eye on. Thanks for flagging.
I think I would like more information on how the money making aspect of certain on line accounts...overlaps with conspiracy sites. It sounds as if conspiracy sites might be good at bringing in the eye balls that help maintain American consumerism.....if so, is the drumming up of conspiracies just one tool in an influencers tool kit?? Is the spreading of paranoia against government and elites at bottom, a money making venture?
But the reality is that a lot of these outlets don't do *that* well. And, consistently, their main source of income seems to either be a small number of deep-pocket fans or a large number of supporters paying small amounts. Unfortunately we don't know much, because they aren't terribly transparent with their financials.
"Its members and supporters swore themselves to subtly."
"and bitterly fought the deep pocket Democratic political machine of Tammany Hall."
A couple examples from the first handful of paragraphs. First is obviously supposed to be "secrecy", second I have no idea if "deep pocket" was intended or something else is missing. I really enjoy the subject matter, but your posts would be significantly improved with even cursory editing. Every few paragraphs there's something that causes the reader to have to stop and figure out what you meant. Apologies for the critique, but the last few posts have had more than a few of these.
On the first: Swearing yourself to secrecy means actually keeping your lips shut. Swearing yourself to subtly means doing a wink-and-a-nod "I know nothing." It's a play on words. Too clever by half? You're probably right.
Tammany Hall was an elites' club that was the main fundraising arm of the Democratic Party. Hence the deep-pockets (Deep-pocketed?) Anyway, I normally add hyperlinks for this sort of thing — as a way of saying "hey, I'm not going to stop and unpack this, if you're curious: This is what I mean." I neglected to do a lot of that hyperlinking here, which I shouldn't skip on.
Everyone needs an editor, myself especially! I know it's slightly annoying to read rough(er) copy, but that's the price we're paying for a fucked up media industry.
Justin, as always, I greatly appreciate the results of your investigations. Their depth is phenomenal. However, I share Marcel's annoyance with the multitude of errors (wrong word, wrong spelling, etc.) in every dispatch. Yes, you need a copy-editor! I believe I've offered my services before (at no charge). Contact me if you're interested.
I may yet take you up on that in the future! Don't take it personally that I haven't: I am trying to keep up the quality/in-depthed-ness of this newsletter while also juggling other gigs. This is journalism these days! It means that I'm often working on them *right* up to the point where they go out. I've heard the feedback, though, and have tried to squeeze in a few extra round of edits each time.
I appreciate it's annoying! I'll redouble efforts to edit more aggressively.
Actually, I hate to break the flow with that quibbling; if communication was accomplished, despite a typo, then picking on it is just 'nyah, I'm smart'. I struggle every day with the desire to save "whom", but I can see the battle is lost, and keep my peace.
Always disengage, walk away. I wish I could do the same with those who sound more rational, but the upside-down worldview is just barely under the skin. I keep giving those people more time than I should.
Thanks for the reminder there are so many of them still around. The most-frightening stories to me area Naomi Wolfe and Laura Logan. I'm pretty sure that both of them are better educated and smarter than I am, but their minds somehow gave way under a disinformation assault.
This needs a lot more study, one can only hope a later age will figure out some reliable treatment. Very hard to treat a disease that causes the sufferer to avoid all treatment.
I have to say, the past few weeks have me feeling that I should spend less time on them as well. But then I see a guy who's poised to be the next PM of the Netherlands, the human embodiment of Islamophobic paranoia. And the guys holding up aid to Ukraine because they think Hunter Biden is a neo-Nazi Ukrainian agent. And the richest guy in the world being leader of the bug-eyed. And I think it becomes pretty clear that if we don't manage this stuff, the world might get a Know-Nothing president.
So, yeah, we need smarter people than myself researching it as well.
So I spent a real, solid minute searching for a good cultural touchstone for this dispatch. But I've also never seen the X-Files. I'm realizing just now that I missed a huge opportunity.
The depth of your coverage is very appreciated.
Excellent investigation into the far-right, far-out conspiracy culture. I would love to hear your take on Naomi Klein's latest, "Doppelganger", her own deep dive into what she calls the "Mirror World," so perfectly exemplified by X22. Also "Misbelief" by Dan Ariely, which I'll be tackling next. We need ro keep shining the spotlight on the conspiracists- and also understand better what makes people go down these rabbit holes.
I haven't picked up a copy of Klein's book yet, but I really should! Could be a good book report for the new year
Yes! It’s a fantastic book. It has a lot of things you would jive with.
Loved your reference to the Know Nothings...they have slipped from current memory, which is a shame.
I may, at some point, write something longer on them. (Maybe lumping in the Anti-Masonic Party as well?) So stay tuned.
I don't think this is (far) off-topic. People start looking for "alternative news" when they suspect that the professional news is missing things, skipping topics. I was just about to make a daily blog post:
http://brander.ca/stackback#altjourno
..about WHY people wander off the range, into the alt-news. I had expected an Al-Jazeera story of Dec 13 to move up to more-seen news sites the next day or so, as others checked out the story. (The story is just an accusation: a bunch of bodies, Palestinians screaming they were shot point-blank, even killed "execution style".) Al-Jaz did not have the IDF denial comment that I'm sure is inevitable.
But now, as my post notes, it has gotten to a dozen news sites, most of them only read by brown people outside 'the West'.
Why wouldn't major news media carry it? This is what drives people to imagine conspiracies and bias and all that. (I don't, because too many are not carrying it. Too big for coinspiracy.)
Is is just that the IDF can shut down a story for many days, not just two, by simply refusing to comment so that the Times/Post/etc can't report both sides?
It's a good case study, actually.
I think there are good reasons why you'd either not match that story or at least take your time doing so — eyewitness accounts in war are notoriously unreliable, Western crews can't access those witnesses, al-Jazeera is not fully independent anymore, etc. And I think there's some bad ones, yeah: Nobody wants to repeat the mistake of the al-Ahli hospital bombing and get swarmed by the various groups that dedicate themselves to calling out "anti-Israel bias" in the media.
For what it's worth, I don't even see this story getting much traction outside of a few sites. Not even the pro-Hamas channels I follow — of which there are quite a few, and they are explicitly supportive or aligned with the leadership — are sharing this, aside from one post from Wednesday.
It's something I'll keep an eye on. Thanks for flagging.
Thanks! Did a postscript on the post today noting that even The Guardian hasn't picked this one up, suggesting it's just really hard to pick up.
Thank-you Justin Ling for wading into the filth so we don’t have to. What sickening, frightful people these are.
I think I would like more information on how the money making aspect of certain on line accounts...overlaps with conspiracy sites. It sounds as if conspiracy sites might be good at bringing in the eye balls that help maintain American consumerism.....if so, is the drumming up of conspiracies just one tool in an influencers tool kit?? Is the spreading of paranoia against government and elites at bottom, a money making venture?
I waded into some of the financials of this industry a few months back: https://www.bugeyedandshameless.com/p/enter-the-anti-vax-dragons-den
But the reality is that a lot of these outlets don't do *that* well. And, consistently, their main source of income seems to either be a small number of deep-pocket fans or a large number of supporters paying small amounts. Unfortunately we don't know much, because they aren't terribly transparent with their financials.
"Its members and supporters swore themselves to subtly."
"and bitterly fought the deep pocket Democratic political machine of Tammany Hall."
A couple examples from the first handful of paragraphs. First is obviously supposed to be "secrecy", second I have no idea if "deep pocket" was intended or something else is missing. I really enjoy the subject matter, but your posts would be significantly improved with even cursory editing. Every few paragraphs there's something that causes the reader to have to stop and figure out what you meant. Apologies for the critique, but the last few posts have had more than a few of these.
On the first: Swearing yourself to secrecy means actually keeping your lips shut. Swearing yourself to subtly means doing a wink-and-a-nod "I know nothing." It's a play on words. Too clever by half? You're probably right.
Tammany Hall was an elites' club that was the main fundraising arm of the Democratic Party. Hence the deep-pockets (Deep-pocketed?) Anyway, I normally add hyperlinks for this sort of thing — as a way of saying "hey, I'm not going to stop and unpack this, if you're curious: This is what I mean." I neglected to do a lot of that hyperlinking here, which I shouldn't skip on.
Everyone needs an editor, myself especially! I know it's slightly annoying to read rough(er) copy, but that's the price we're paying for a fucked up media industry.
Justin, as always, I greatly appreciate the results of your investigations. Their depth is phenomenal. However, I share Marcel's annoyance with the multitude of errors (wrong word, wrong spelling, etc.) in every dispatch. Yes, you need a copy-editor! I believe I've offered my services before (at no charge). Contact me if you're interested.
I may yet take you up on that in the future! Don't take it personally that I haven't: I am trying to keep up the quality/in-depthed-ness of this newsletter while also juggling other gigs. This is journalism these days! It means that I'm often working on them *right* up to the point where they go out. I've heard the feedback, though, and have tried to squeeze in a few extra round of edits each time.
I appreciate it's annoying! I'll redouble efforts to edit more aggressively.
This is either extended kidding about a typo, or everybody missed it. I was going to let it go.
Subtly == adverb for how you do something.
Subtlety == noun for an attitude that you can swear yourself to.
Now that we've cleared away the important issues, back to saving the world.
Oh for heaven's sake, I'm an idiot. Thank you for clearing that up. Apologies to the others for not picking up on it.
Actually, I hate to break the flow with that quibbling; if communication was accomplished, despite a typo, then picking on it is just 'nyah, I'm smart'. I struggle every day with the desire to save "whom", but I can see the battle is lost, and keep my peace.
I entirely understand why it irks people. A bungled phrase can really disrupt someone's reading flow!
Always disengage, walk away. I wish I could do the same with those who sound more rational, but the upside-down worldview is just barely under the skin. I keep giving those people more time than I should.
Thanks for the reminder there are so many of them still around. The most-frightening stories to me area Naomi Wolfe and Laura Logan. I'm pretty sure that both of them are better educated and smarter than I am, but their minds somehow gave way under a disinformation assault.
This needs a lot more study, one can only hope a later age will figure out some reliable treatment. Very hard to treat a disease that causes the sufferer to avoid all treatment.
I have to say, the past few weeks have me feeling that I should spend less time on them as well. But then I see a guy who's poised to be the next PM of the Netherlands, the human embodiment of Islamophobic paranoia. And the guys holding up aid to Ukraine because they think Hunter Biden is a neo-Nazi Ukrainian agent. And the richest guy in the world being leader of the bug-eyed. And I think it becomes pretty clear that if we don't manage this stuff, the world might get a Know-Nothing president.
So, yeah, we need smarter people than myself researching it as well.
So I spent a real, solid minute searching for a good cultural touchstone for this dispatch. But I've also never seen the X-Files. I'm realizing just now that I missed a huge opportunity.