I listened to the pod between you and Walter yesterday and I just want you to know that you were ambushed on MSNBC and it was a disgusting, terrifying thing to see. I plan on writing more about it, how Medhi Hasan was basically doing the bidding of the Democratic Party, like a Good Soldier -- exactly like the panel who interrogated you for the Twitter Files. I know that people like me who used to be a faithful Democrat think this is somehow the good fight. But my god, can't they see what they've become? Can't they see that what they're doing is trying to stop someone from telling the truth? It remains shocking that this is where we are.
I just wanted to offer you moral support because that is what you have given me as I found myself unable to go along with what I was seeing. Finding your writing, your clarity, your objectivity, your willingness to ask questions and to be maybe the last real journalist was life saving almost, not to be dramatic. Had that never happened to me I'd be on Twitter trying to destroy you as they are all now. Destroy you so that anything you say is disregarded.
Now that they have amassed so much cultural, political and institutional power they can't stand it that there is one person out there who is willing to see them in a critical light -- which is your job. Shame on them. What a disgrace that interview was.
I hope you enjoy your vacation. You have earned it. Don't let them take even a minute of your time with your family in fretting over that stupid idiotic embarrassing interview that will one day be used as proof to show exactly how corrupt MSNBC has become, though they're far from the only ones.
They have a gulag waiting for you. Silent majority is too distracted by peripheral bs to notice. We are soft and cowed by a tyranny of the minority. Enjoy your family. There are some things those loonies can never take away.
You may have been ambushed, but I would say you were sucker punched again. The first time was by Musk. You got involve with a very rich and immoral man that you are now afraid of. You allowed him to skew your data against against Dems and dictate where you published it. Why? And spare us your altruistic crap. Then you showed up totally unprepared for Husan, and he mopped the floor with you. What did you do with the brilliant Matt Taibbi that we all know and love? You really undermined your credibility and his reputation. Do you think you can survive it? I am one of your longest and biggest fans, and I’m not sure I can survive what you did.
You're onto their tactics! I thought similarly, that after the Congressional hearing, the system figured Matt hadn't been beaten (far from it--Dumbass Debbie Wasserman Schultz commented on his skyrocketing Twitter followers, demonstrating that more and more people want what Matt's telling), so this was Plan C (Plan B having been the hearing and Plan A having been what Hasan did at first: "PR work for the world's richest..."
What will Plan D be? Cause A, B, and C have sucked.
JB - Matt has been spot on. And Hassan's attack was a partisan hit job. Agreed.
But make no mistake about it. Matt had reported for years on how right wing media like FOX and NewsMax etc... push Republican propaganda and lies all day long. And Matt will NEVER EVER talk about that on this substack because if he did he would lose subscribers and thus income.
Hassan is the exact same. He had to attack Matt because if he focused on the real issue, MSA and Twitter controlling what was Tweeted, Hassan would lose audience.
Matt is great but don't fool yourself. he is no different than Hassan. Not in the least bit
8G... Matt's subscribers are only loyal to him as long as he does not turn his laser sharp reporting on right wing media. He wrote numerous times, before substack, about how media outlets like FOX and NewMax etc... lie all of the time to push the narrative of the GOP or their advertisers. Or more likely they ignore topics to keep these parties happy.
But Matt will never, ever report on that with this substack because he would lose viewers. Just like Fox had to lie about Jan 6th so they would not lose viewers (not my opinion, that is what they said under oath)/. Hassan and MSBNC are no different. They have to attack Matt because if they don't they will lose viewers.
I pay to be a member of Matt's substack. I like him. But i don't fool yourself. He is no different than FOX or MSNBC.... And his reward is that he is making a ton of money for playing the game the way the rules are laid out.
I don't think so, bro. Two things happened to channel Matt's reporting on the DNC and corporate media: 1) those two groups started aiming at independent journalists, and 2) Twitter Files dropped in his lap. You go where the story takes you. His Twitter followers went up following the start of the Twitter Files, not because he stopped attacking Fox and Newsmax. Like classic muckrakers, he goes after the powerful.
But here's some truth in advertising: all you right wing people out there who think Matt is now one of you, think again.
JB - Matt is not one of them, when it comes to the right wingers that pray to him.
But his commitment to IGNORING right wing journalisms lies started long before the Twitter Files dropped in his lap. And his rapid growth in subs aligned directly with his attacks on the left and his IGNORING of equal hypocrisy on the right. I've been following him since before substack. I have watched it from start to end.
I get what he is doing and support him. But he is no different than Hassan or Tucker Carlson... NONE of them will do anything that turns their audience away from them in the name of 'truth and balance".
The majority of posters on this board pray to the God of right wing journalism like FOX and NewsMax and The Daily Wire etc... Evidence: They regurgitate that media's half truths and spin like its gospel on these boards.
And they ignore and are uninformed on the issues that the rest of the world really cares about like wages and health care and poverty and corp greed etc... because those media ignore such topics exactly as Chomsky articulated in Manufacturing Consent and in the intro to Matts book Hate Inc...
8G - Agreed, what Hassan did was not professional. Agreed liberal media has serious problems.
Sadly, right wing media has been doing this for generations now and has produced generations of misinformed voters. Misinformed on everything from the 2020 election results to tax cuts to the rich to universal health care the list goes on and on... The left is a mess. The right has produced generations of misinformed and angry voters.
TWC - Not what i was saying or think. Not even close.
It is the people on this board that are crystal clear that because Matt accurately calls out the liberal media for pushing corporate and government propaganda that "therefore" right wing propaganda (Fox, NewsMax, Daily Wire et al...) are CORRECT in their rhetoric and reporting.
How do i know such a large # of the people posting on this board think that? Because the regurgitate the half truths (Climate change is a hoax, government is the problem, Trump isn't misinformed etc..) along with the flat out lies (we don't really know who won the 2020 election, Trumps tax cuts helped the economy, deregulation is good for the economy, we can't afford Universal Health care etc...) and of course they never even mention the things the right wing pols don't want discussed like Child Poverty in the US, Out of Control Military Spending, Corporate Control of law makers etc....)
So yes, most people on this message board think that because Matt wont touch on right wing media propaganda on his substack the way he did in his book they are free to consume and trust it.
8G... I hear what you are saying and do not disagree that "liberal media has taken it to the next level"
I also agree that the media is controlled by the Oligarchs to serve their own interests. That has been common through out the history of democracy going back to the Greeks.
Two issues:
(1) Right wing media has equaled and surpassed "liberal media" in the area of pushing propaganda. First it ignores the issues Americans truly care about like wages declines, health care, the environment, eduction and corporate greed. Second it has created astonishingly misinformed viewers on everything from climate change, to tax cuts to the rich helping the economy to "stop the steal".
(2) While oligarchs have controlled the press going back to the Greeks that is not how it always has been been. There have been exceptions. And when we have those exceptions then Democracy thrives and when we don't have those exceptions democracy wilts.
It is clear from the posters on Matts board that the vast majority buy into Right Wing Corporate/ oligarch funded media lies and half truths. And any time Matt challenges that form of Media, as he did in his book Hate Inc. he is going to lose followers / subscribers.
So, like Fox news on "stop the steal", (per court documents) on this substack Matt is going to tell his subscribers what they want to hear and ignore all else. He sold very few copies of "Hate Inc" where he told both sides. He has made a small fortune doing what Fox does, telling his subscribers ONLY what they want to hear. Do you disagree?
Medhi H. was often WRONG in his line of questioning, but this was hardly an ad hominem attack interview. I have subscribed to Taibbi for FOUR YEARS, but that doesn't make me any more likely to parrot pro-Taibbi tribal bullshit than I am to parrot the US elite's tribal bullshit.
Hasan's first question: "Why do you believe these Twitter files are so important, and what should our viewers know about what's in them?"
Second point, cites agreement that FBI spends too much time and effort on social media efforts.
Third point: "Does your reporting show evidence of government censorship? I don't think so." Shows Biden *campaign* requests, points out they are not government. Says that the tweets in question also were to take down Hunter Biden near nudes or whatever, violation of twitter terms of service. Asks if Taibbi "didn't know [that] in which case that's kind of incompetent, or if he was hiding that fact". Matt goes on tirade about how MSNBC is incompetent and always has been.
That's true, but it was non-responsive to the point. Especially since a minute later Matt says he DID know that was the content "of course". So the IF from Hasan's construction is not held and he's not even calling Taibbi incompetent in the first place, he's simply accusing him of hiding something, which is fair.
To sum up: this was an interview with challenging questions, and Hasan embarassed himself later with false premises in some of those challenging questions. A better prepared Taibbi would have eviscerated him on the spot, and Hasan was later eviscerated on Twitter and shown to have no clothes. However, Taibbi's stance that this was an ad hominem attack interview is off base.
Yes, journalism is in trouble and Matt is one of the last practicing good journalism.
I would say Matt wasn't ready for the exact questions but you can never be that far in the weeds on everything they might ask walking in. But Matt needs to get lessons from Jordan Peterson on how to handle such contentious situations overall, I think.
Honestly Matt walked in combative with a chip on his shoulder. His seemingly triggered response to everything asked didn't serve him well. He could have answered everything simply straight up and calmly, and he would have come off a lot better.
In contrast to this, Matt did great in the Congressional hearing and came off spectacularly. Maybe the attacks are wearing on him. They certainly did on Peterson, given his eventual illness and need for a break.
@ Sasha Stone - RioRosie - Rebecca Lee - Kelly Green - et al⁉
First of all this sub-thread, originated by Sasha Stone, should not be subjected to uninformed opinions by anyone not willing to familiarize themselves with the factual, readily available, substance of the discussion
A discussion that ostensibly only occurred on MSNBC because Mr. Hasan wanted to disparage both Mr. Taiibi's association with Elon Musk, and Mr. Musk's alleged hypocrisy over a matter in India on Twitter.🐍🧪
Mr. Taiibi seemed to be surprised by Mr. Hasan's aggressive interruptions and obsessive interrogation into matters that had nothing to do with his "Twitter Files" investigative reporting; behaviors very similar to the biased political posturing he had experienced when attempting to provide informed testimony at the recent Congressional hearing.☣🕸
If uninformed opinions are not needed, you can simply hold your tongue. I literally wrote out Hasan's first three comments, so clearly I don't need your link to the video. All three comments are relevant to the Twitter files, falsifying your "nothing to do with" construction.
Couldn't agree more that Hasan's goal was to disparage, but asking tough questions about the matters at hand is in bounds, unless we're going to both be annoyed that journalism is dead and then not call that journalism?
The opening comment in my reply to Sasha et al earlier, regarding uninformed opinions, addressed Rebecca Lee's candid honesty relating that she had not viewed the debate; I had no intention of impugning or contesting your familiarity with the topic🕸⁉
As far as your snarky misconstrued understanding❔, and resultant "tongue" lashing is concerned, thank you for making me aware of your comprehensive reading skills.👩🏫
Matt is a great journalist. But he is no different than FOX or MSNBC... The evidence is irrefutable, FOX admits they pushed Trumps Jan 6th lie, not because they thought it was true, but because if they did not push it they would lose audience share.
Matt is a great journalist and Hassan unfairly attacked him, but he does the same thing on this substack. He attacks liberal media like CNN and NYT, accurately, for pushing false narratives while IGNORING right wing media pushing false narratives ("Stop the steal" "Tax cuts to the rich trickle down to the poor" "Russia Gate" "Vaccines" etc....) every day.
Matt wont point to right wing media lying like CNN and the NYT for the same reason Hassan would not be fair to Tiabbi. In both cases they only tell half of the truth because if they told the whole truth they would lose audience share.
I love Matt but i dont see how he is any different than Hassan. he's not!
Matt is different from Hasan in that he gets it right 90% of the time and cares to get it right 95% of the time. Hasan only wants to make his points and got much very very wrong.
Getting it right 95% of the time does not mean one is not pushing propaganda. Read Manufacturing Concent. It's not about getting it right nearly as much as it is about putting the right context around it.
Hassan was wrong because he IGNORED the meat of the Twitter files, which was NSA involvement with Twitter content publishing. Not the 3 petty errors Matt made.
Matt is spot on with his attacks on the left and their journalists. But he now IGNORES the media on the right's endless lies and ignoring of context and parroting what the RNC wants them to say.
He called it out before this substack. Now he ignores it because it would reduce his number of subscribers. Just like FOX reporting on Jan 6th and th stop the steal LIE Trump was pushing. Carlson calling out one of Powells lies and then still talking 95% of the time about how the LIE is justified is "text book" propaganda.. Read Manufacturing Concent. Matt has and used to quote it all of the time.
Matt and Chomsky are hated by the left.. I get it. Neither supports the right t and their lies either. they both think Right wing media lies so much they need not even talk about. But they both think the people that fall for that media are well..... You know that, right?
No. Taibbi isnt IGNORING ANYTHING. He's reporting on SOMETHING, just not on everything. This.is absurd logic. See: Red Herring, strawman, context collapse, et al
Matt's reasons for writing less on that stuff could be a simple as being busier with what's on his plate. If you are perceived as favorable to certain stories, you may get access to more of those stories. I don't think less of Glenn Greenwald because after Snowden came to him he paid less attention to other things he used to report on before that. You have ZERO basis for claiming that Taibbi's focus is shifting for financial gain.
And nobody said that getting it right 95% of the time meant that. I said it was a difference, so of course they could share that feature. Hasan (one s) pushes BS with zero fidelity to the facts, a major difference. Having a fact-based opinion that you spotlight is very different. Matt bends stuff, particularly when he's covering the business world where he's honestly not very savvy, but he works hard on fidelity to the truth and that's worth a lot.
Tiabbi wrote an entire book on media hypocrisy and found the time to report on the right and left equally. Read it, its called Hate Inc. And when he did that his audience was far smaller than it was when he shifted to reporting to only media on the left.
When he pivoted to revealing only the left his audience exploded. That is how he bacame so big on Substack. And that is why Musk chose him to drop the twitter files, which again blew up his audience.
Yes, there is irrefutable evidence that he is making FAR more money from his one sided substack reporting only on the left media than he ever made with books like HATE INC which focus on the hypocricy of the both the left and right media.
Good for you to see the media rot coming from the DNC-aligned media. I'm sure that some of your old "faithful Democrat" acquaintances now regard you as ultra-MAGA hatemonger just for pointing out clear bad-faith and biased coverage. For many of us, we don't trust the conservative-leaning media much either but the blatant unrepentant lying coming from our traditional "unbiased" media needs to be resisted with that much more force.
No one wants this fight. I'm sure Taibbi doesn't, but when one party is continuously bullying you there isn't much of a choice.
Just dropping in to say that THIS comment needs to be amplified; it's so important that we recognize that human aspect in one another, and more importantly in those we admire.
Fallible? He was a showboat and a fraud. An average mind burnished to a high polish by education and ambition.
As Chris Hedges said after a debate with Hedges he was a bully. Michael Parenti said the same, and both of those fine men clearly prevailed in both knowledge and insight. Meanwhile Hitchens crowed more loudly and drew crowds, who were overly impressed by a man who overly impressed with himself. His excuse for supporting the Iraq invasion was that the world was better off without Sadam Hussein. These are the reasons that LeCarre called him an odious twerp, and that Gore Vidal laughed when someone asked if Hitchens was his “heir apparent”.
Actually, Vidal at one point did anoint Hitchens as his "heir apparent" and only rescinded the consecration when Hitchens lurched to the right, leant his support to the Iraq war, and joined the "crackpot" chorus who challenged the Bush administration's version of 9/11 with a buffet of conspiracy theories.
Agreeing with someone on one issue is about as meaningful as ordering the same thing for lunch. Of course there were overlaps. But to me there’s no coming back from Hitchens’ support of the illegal, criminal, and inhuman invasion of a country based on lies. If Hitchens had half the intellect he pretended to have he’d have known all of that. As a thinker he was made utterly irrelevant by this. But we still have Sam Harris quoting his man “Hitch” while ignoring that half of his famous witticisms were used long before he pretended to have witted them. (The “free will” one goes back at least to Bertrand Russell).
As for Hedges, I’m deeply moved by his courage and resolve; I’m grateful to live in the same world as him. The idea that Gore Vidal would have considered anyone his heir show no understanding of the man on any level.
Please excuse inappropriate tirade. I was really just trying to spare Mr. Taibbi the taint of an unworthy association. He’s worth a dozen Hitchinsesses. Peace.
No apologies necessary, or warranted. You bring up solid points in criticism of Hitchens, which many have pointed to numerous times, incl myself. Also, agreed Taibbi is invaluable to us. Its unbelievable that Hasan invoked Chomsky re: lies of omission being a tool of propaganda. Truly Bizarro world...
Just a funny coda to this subject. On Bill Maher’s Club Random podcast Fran Liebowitz had some very unkind words for Hitchins ending with: “Name one woman who was his friend. You can’t, there weren’t any.(Paraphrased). I will say this in his favor, he seems to have been excellent company, and a very good friend, to men anyway.
Well, whatever. No doubt others have some unkind words for Liebowitz as well. She exemplifies the disingenuous poseur: sound & fury, signifying nothing.
"The idea that Gore Vidal would have considered anyone his heir" was Vidal's idea, so you're effectively arguing that Vidal lacked a degree of self-awareness and might also have been marked by moments of high grandiosity, which is not a bad argument to make at all.
I lean conservative, but have a great deal of respect for real “classical” Liberals. Keep at it Matt, don’t let them use your integrity to trap you again. Shrug it off.
Real issue is how do we use your work to help make things right again. What do we do now? How can we fight back? Why the hell are Dems still doing well in critical elections, despite all of the serious crap that they are pushing? I just don’t understand, where are all of the good people? Standing around watching?
They have been in charge of educating our youth for quite some time now and the 18-25 years old generally are the easiest to motivate to vote of our entire population. They are the largest voting block out there and very easy to manipulate since politically they are not very smart. When an election cycle gets down to the general election the liberal teachers scare the kids over some topic and then the colleges all turn out and vote 90-95% of their populations.
Good point. Also, I think the GOP needs to be more pragmatic about abortion.
I think most Americans want lots of leeway in the 1st trimester, strong restrictions in the 2nd tri, near total prohibition during the 3rd tri - and no partial birth abortions.
Politics means compromise & trying to understand why others think differently; not shoving your beliefs on other people. Wake-up GOP, for America’s sake.
My thought exactly, on abortion. I think it’s wrong, but also realize we’re suckers for any technological solution that works for our convenience, as abortion does. So, Republicans are forever hung up on that—in the meantime, Democrats will sweep next time, and probably outlaw the Republicans (Constitution means nothing to them). And guess what? Abortion will be made federally legal! Republicans seem to have no sense how high the stakes are.
Politics means compromise, I agree. Except that whatever this racket is in the U.S. seems to largely be about taking extreme positions in order to get votes because extreme positions are better at getting attention.
Politics has long been described as the game of choosing sides. Hardly any room for compromise with politics. I believe it's more accurate to say that governing is the act of compromise. Politics and governance are two separate things.
Midterm elections proved this. Voters were willing to look past rising crime, inflation, insane covid response, etc, and instead prioritized abortion rights. Your breakdown of compromise by trimester is perfectly reasonable to me, but it’s clear if you really listen to conservative media, many are willing to sacrifice all their political capital towards outlawing it completely.
We’re stuck on this Dem led runaway train until GOP does a full reboot of their policies. I figure we’ve got some tough years ahead.
A theme in the thread below is the youth vote. Yes, they are brainwashed and gullible but they vote when aggrieved and like it or not, fellow conservatives, the very thought of limiting abortion pisses them right out of their pants. They cannot see moral issues in anything in life yet -- they are stuck in perpetural adolesence, even when well past their twenties -- and the Dems will play the abortion game no matter what. Live your morality, beloved fellow right-to-lifers, but shut the hell up on abortion. We got rid of Roe.
One more thing: Remember when some of us warned years ago that the gay movement wouldn't stop simply at tolerance or fairness or domestic partnership protections but wanted the full monty of marriage while still winking at promiscuity? Well gay marriage is now the law. The left/female/youth/suburban mom sees us on abortion the same way...it's the camel's nose under the tent...we got rid of Roe but now we want a total outlawing. If you wish to pursue that we will never see the White House again. They are better armed in this war than we are. Maybe not in the next life, but in this one.
Except that truth should always be the goal. Otherwise we end up with arbitrary definitions of life. This is the fodder of those that trend toward what serves them best. We do live in a system of laws that put truth at a premium. Thankfully, in our lawful society, there are penalties for taking another’s life for social or economic reasons. In many states pregnant mothers are carved out of these laws by not recognizing the pre-born baby as a life. This is a necessary recognition (that it is not a life), otherwise it would be criminal under the law. Physicians should not be criminalized for performing an act that is legal, we agree, and we may have debate…but not on what constitutes life. The question is simply whether the law sees that first trimester baby as a living being with rights or not. Biologically there is no question that it is an alive human, but the law can define whether it has rights in a variety of ways as the variability in our Federalist nation shows. No matter what state you reside in, though, It is fact that an OB/GYN is taking care of two lives when they care for a pregnant patient, which is why at conception, if the mother is on medication that may be harmful to the baby they adjust, change, or discontinue those medication‘s. Likewise, if that fetus were not life, there would be no need for physician intervention. Having witnessed a 15 week termination under ultrasound surveillance in medical school, my view on this changed forever. I am proud to be a healer, who values and respects life. I recognize with empathy the suffering of a mother who is pregnant with an unwanted child, but I hold that in a different balance than those who believe that termination of a healthy fetus is “reproductive health”. Just saying…politics do not justify ends for the means for some of us. I sleep better at night knowing this and I am grateful for not having sold my soul to the devil for a mob.
I think the GOP is wise to let the states shake things out for themselves and abide by what the voters endorse in referendums, if it is a state where there is not a clear cultural consensus-like Kansas and Wisconsin, where the voters kept abortion in a limited form. Let California be California and Alabama be Alabama-that’s what the Constution says (or doesn’t explicitly say) on the matter.
Tammy Bruce had a book out quite some time ago called The Death of Right and Wrong. In it she explains the urgency of the far left getting control of the schools and the kids. My family laughed at her “dramatization” but as the years have gone by what she warned about has come to fruition.
"Tammy Bruce had a book out quite some time ago called The Death of Right and Wrong. In it she explains the urgency of the far left getting control of the schools and the kids. My family laughed at her “dramatization” but as the years have gone by what she warned about has come to fruition."
As James Lindsay points out for the Left (Progressives) there is no Right or Wrong there is only Power. They reject even the idea of Absolute Truth. There is only Power.
BTW this is a really Really REALLY Bad idea. Putting my Christian hat on..this comes Right From The Pit Of Hell.
While I agree I was pointing when the Liberal teachers are basically still controlling the ideals of their kids. The college aged voting block gets manipulated very easily.
I’ve appreciated Matt since he appeared on Imus. He and my kween Sasha remind me of my dear liberal friends in college. They were passionate Kennedy supporters in 1980, but they respected my cultish devotion to Reagan. Imagine cracking playful jokes about opposing candidates with folks. It happened. 🤷🏻♂️
I have a slate of modern heroes defined by a new paradigm of truth and courage in a world sliding into totalitarian control. (You, Kheriaty, Battacharya, O’Keefe, Kuldorff, Greenwald just to name a few). You have placed your livelihoods on the line. I know there are business decisions, but it feels as though the Cabal got to Musk. This is frightening. The Cabal is supported by the corruptocrats and the lowering of eyes of cowards. They justify their hypocrisy with word salads and lies. Hasan is one such. Once you are attune to seeing it, like Winston did in Orwell’s 1984, you can recognize it immediately. Trump will get convicted and then later turned over on appeal, but the message will be clear to the rank and file Americans that the system is rigged against them. He will lose in 2024, and our Constitutional republic will lose along with him. The process (wielded by our “democratic” government) is the punishment and this is a clear totalitarian tactic. You shined a light on that and it has put you in the Cabal’s cross-hairs. You are truly courageous!! Keep up the good fight no matter how futile it may seem at times. We are with you and our children are worth it. As the Easter/Passover season signifies, doing the right thing when it is difficult always involves suffering. THANKS FOR YOUR COURAGE, Mr. Taibbi!
"I listened to the pod between you and Walter yesterday and I just want you to know that you were ambushed on MSNBC"
What A Shock! "The Televised Mental Institution" (Dave Rubin) Ambushed someone they don't like.
So what did we learn from this (I mean other than MSNBC is a bunch of scum bags)? Know you will be attacked, treated unfairly. Know they're goal is Not to find the truth and inform their viewers. That mean Have Your Ducks In A Row.
When I 1st went online (1998) on Free Republic I made a statement. Shortly there after I was "taken to the woodshed", one person asked a for my source to back up what I said. Lesson Learned. Since then don't make statement Without sources (the more the merrier) to back up what I say.
Hassan has a book called "How to Win Every Argument".
The problem is that with an argument, you are trying to determine WHO is right. With a discussion, you are trying to determine WHAT is right.
A perfect example of the latter is America This Week. So ignore the glitzy marketing for a book that will screw up your life. Avoid argumentative people and save your time for people willing to have a constructive discussion.
No, they cannot see, because they dont WANT to.. Motivated reasoning is a helluva drug, and these folks are vastly more illiberal than those they unabashedly paint as the demons they wish them to be. By orders of magnitude. As has been noted, this is a hyperdriven, secular religion (neé cult). They (Hasan, Maddow, et al) are appointed the Priesthood, and, to further the analogy, are abusing those very acolytes who are their congregation. This is bad...real bad. I dont see a way out.
Go on Twitter and look at the trending topic of Matt's name. Read those blue check assholes and you tell me if that counts as "scrutinizing." This is attempting to destroy and discredit him. Also hilarious that he's the subject instead of, you know, the ADMINISTRATIVE STATE monitoring the thoughts and speech of its citizens. Hang your heads in shame.
Much worse happened to DJT and and the journalists stood by. Now they're fleeing a sinking ship called MSM. Matt will survive and he'll be an even better writer.
I was listening to the guys from Due Dissidence and Russel was interviewing some protesters at the Trump clown show and he questioned them on should Bush be charged with war crimes??well the reaction was nuts blowing horns and just making lots of noise to shut him down .My point is Russel said these democrats are the same people that would watch the Msm and there is no getting through to these idiots just a waste of your precious time Matt.
I already have checked Twitter and read the Taibbi/Musk threads. And I would say, yes, the heightened and animated interest of the tweeters in the taibbi/musk dust-up passes for scrutiny of Mr. Taibbi's work. And a handful of "blue check assholes" on Twitter couldn't possibly have the ability (or power) to destroy or discredit Taibbi or any other public figure.
Not sure about the hilarity of it all but you do have company in detecting a comic element to the whole affair. Many of Taibbi's Twitter critics have expressed their opinion that it is both amusing and ironic that Mr. Taibbi was shown the door (doors?) by the same creep that opened the door in the first place, so to speak.
Pick a subject, any subject, and you will find a multitude of conflicting opinions and assessments.
I have never been on Twitter; even for Twitter Files. But I sort of believed what was being laid out in the Twitter Files must be be revolutionary; I believed it could be great.
But now this supposed deal about MTaibbi v. Musk is again, the way TPTB dismiss tiny challenges. They will smear both sides multiplied by 5.
Neither righteous side should take their bait. And neither should we. Prove it. Whatever you are offering.
Scrutinize? That's what you call it when the entire media comes out and demonizes Matt? I have yet to hear one solid argument other than MSM to go after Matt's character . Sasha says it best.
I'm suggesting that a good many of Taibbi's critics believe there is little substance to Taibbi's work. A good many critics also believe that any scorn directed Taibbi's way is more than justified by his decision to work with someone like Elon Musk in the manner in which he did and that this assessment is more than justified by the manner in which his professional relationship with Mr. Musk came crashing down.
They're not ignoring the substance of the work. Their opinion and judgment of Taibbi's work is inextricably tethered to their judgment and lack of faith in Mr. Taibbi's journalistic practices ---it's their belief that the work is disingenuous junk.
Everybody with a brain can see that Democrats simply ignore or attack whatever is inconvenient. The idea that they're incredibly principled but don't think the story is big is laughable.
They know they will be fired if they stop toeing the line, and they will simply be replaced by somebody who will.
I'm not referring to democrats. You got democrats on the brain, bud. That can't be pleasant. So, you don't think there's a possibility that Taibbi might be a little bit full of shit? You don't find it odd that Taibbi has essentially been writing the same story over and over for the last 6-7 years? At the expense of all other issues? Oh, sure, it's the 1st amendment, freedom of speech, yada, yada, yada--it's important-- what American could argue that it isn't an important issue?
But if taibbi is going to focus on the same subject exclusively, why not provide a little context? We're at war, a new kind of war---a cyber war between competing nations consisting of skillfully devised campaigns of propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, designer psyops from intel agencies around the world so sophisticated in their subtlety that they're less detectable than the air around us. I think taking at least a short stroll down this avenue to be of a piece with exploring domestic incursions into social media by the the U.S. spy network. No?
Alas, the problem is far more extensive and insidious than Taibbi's one-man spelunking can even begin to convey. I don't mean to make light of it, but is there really anybody here surprised that the U.S. intelligence network is monitoring social media for all kinds of monsters and hobgoblins, foreign and domestic? And are sloppy and disingenuous about it and lie and prevaricate and suggest that it's none of your goddamn business what we're doing? Wouldn't it actually be a surprise if they weren't doing all this snooping? And then there's the weird Racket meme that it's a DEMOCRAT PROJECT TO GUT THE 1ST AMENDMENT AND ENSLAVE ALL AMERICANS. Huh-huh. The real deep state laughs out loud at that one.
I'd like to see an attempt at explaining what some of this means for the average citizen in our daily lives. Or the geopolitical ramifications of every major power training cameras and microphones on every square foot of real estate on earth. We know most of it is illegal. Big deal. Governments specialize in illegal. Illegal is the one thing governments do well and so keep on doing it. What does our government want for us? And then of course what do they want from us?
What are we---kids? What I'd like to hear or read is some sort of context for all of this. Is Donald Trump up to his knees in Russian influence? Of course he is. Has been for at least 30 years, if you've been paying attention. Did the democrats and press irresponsibly blow a gasket over Trump's surprise election? Of course they did.
There's a small cohort in the media and elsewhere that hypothesize that Taibbi is actually working for one of the alphabet agencies because he's writing about the same shit every week ad nauseam. And has glaring omissions in most of his reporting. That there's a quid pro quo. And then taking a reportorial handout from a psychopath like Musk that can only be viewed as a propaganda project and maybe even a psyop on the part of Musk.
Musk is a weird dude who loves chaos and is capable of conjuring vast quantities of it and that was unquestionably not a good decision on the part of Mr. Taibbi to engage with Musk, especially on THAT project. Whatever else a lot of money can buy, it can buy a lot of chaos.
And this whole break-up between Taibbi and Musk and Musk's accusation that Taibbi is an "employee of substack." How absurd is that? And then I think: to me that sorta sounds like Musk shorthand for "substack is in bed with the government and Taibbi is big cheese at substack"...and, and, and...Might mark the beginning of a brand new Musk psyop dreamed up on the spot in the shower. Watch for it!
Most of the rest of the world is either indifferent towards the "twitter files" or dismiss it as a hot mess of nonsense with a dash of meaninglessness. Mostly they just don't give a shit one way or another. It's effect on the civilized nations of the world is nil. The rest of the world: can't live with'em, can't live without'em.
Feldspar, have you read any of Matt Taibbi's books? To suggest that he's a one trick pony is absurd and invalidates the many, many, many, many words you wrote after that. He spent weeks covering school board issues in Loudon County Va. that was critical to the Senate elections where Yonkin pulled a big upset. But I guess you don't REALLY read Taibbi's work. If you did, you'd know what you wrote is wrong!
If you looked up the word Obtuse in the dictionary, it would probably have your picture. I didn't have to "labor" very hard to show the fallacy of your argument. It amazes me how some people can string two sentences together with lots of words, that make absolutely no sense. You clearly said that MT is a "one trick pony" by saying that he's been hammering this one issue for 6-7 years. I gave you FACTS that prove you wrong. So, end of story. You can stop looking foolish now. Bye!
I don't agree. It's a simple search for truth as I view this from the cheap seats. If the pursuit of truth sometimes involves working with Elon, so be it. We can't all agree, all the time. I believe there's an objective reality, perhaps more nuanced but it does exist but may be interpreted from different points of view (e.g. some see Trump as a grifter, others don't care and focus on his policies). What I find interesting is the ongoing gaslighting when one side attempts to proffer a POV that is very real - you know, the reality that cities were burning via "peaceful protesting" or the "worst attack on democracy since the Civil War" (Jan 6). For some reason, both sides prefer to point only to their interpretation and we can't have a rational argument. I do think Matt is attempting to show objective truth. If you don't like it...you are free to disagree and we can continue to have nice chats. To suggest he's a one trick pony misses the mark by far. He reports on a wide range of issues and has been reliably consistent. Unlike, say, the NYT, WSJ or WaPost.
And BTW, your words: "But if taibbi is going to focus on the same subject exclusively". And: "You don't find it odd that Taibbi has essentially been writing the same story over and over for the last 6-7 years?"
Marr: “How can you know that I’m self-censoring? How can you know that journalists are..”
Chomsky: “I’m not saying your self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”
Here is a quote from the Orwell article that Chomsky mentions.
“Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news — things which on their own merits would get the big headlines-being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralised, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.”
The most that the average citizen of the empire could tell you about Julian is that he has "smelly socks" and he's a "cat abuser.
The Empire is "this close" to war ON Russia, censorship and deep state disinfo is on full blast, and most Americans, Canadians and Brits are blissfully unaware of it all. Try and tell them otherwise, and like the finely conditioned tools that they are, they will name call you, laugh, ridicule and then report you.
No. The entirety of the "scrutiny" was a series of logical fallacies. Matt, along with Schellenberger, Woodhouse, Rogan, and a small coterie of honest people, are showing how what passes as the media in the US had been corrupted by the IC establishment. How that group worked against the interests and rights of the people who fund it. This scares the piss out of the Mandarin class, as it shows how little worth they actually provide.
My only disappointment was a comment I made to Elon on Twitter obv didn’t come true.. that was that “Matt is on vacation and hopefully someone will throw his phone into the ocean!” 😂😂😂💕💕💕💕
Yes Hassan's interview was an ambush of Matt. Totally unfair because he ignored the point of the Twitter files, which was the NSA telling Twitter what to publish and not publish.
But Matt never, ever publishes stories on right wing media like Fox News, NewMax etc... pushing Republican lies and corporate lies daily. He knows they do it. He has written about it on the past.
But today he ignores that because if he did he would lose a large piece of his, Democrat hating, audience. If Hassan did not IGNORE/ underplay that NSA involvement part of the Twitter files then he too would not be telling his audience what they want to hear and, like Matt would lose a large piece of his audience.
How is Hassan any different than Matt ignoring right wing media lies? That I dont get?
There is no scenario in which Matt Taibbi would have Medhi Hassan on his show and use it as an opportunity to talk over him, smear his character, attempt to humiliate him and then put all of his favorite "beat downs" on Twitter. Why wouldn't he do that? Because unlike Hassan, Matt is not a partisan. He would never engage in that kind of team sport. Hassan was like Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the rest of the IDIOTIC PANEL in Congress that did exactly the same thing. The idea that this all should be partisan is only because the Democrats see Elon Musk as a clear and present threat to their power. Destroying Taibbi is a way to discredit any influence Musk might have. It's such a sick ugly game. I'm so glad not to be part of it.
I agree that Matt would never have Hassaon his show and do a beat down like that.
And given i have been reading Matt since he wrote "The Divide" back in 2014 I know he is no conservative.
That said, on this substack he only reports on left wing media hypocricy. In his book, Hate Inc. he reported about hypocricy on the left and the right.
So no, he is not a partisan. But on this substacks he ignores right wing media hypocricy. And for good reason. If he wrote about it, like he did in Hate Inc.. he would lose most of his paid subscribers.
That is how he is no different than Hassan. They are both appealing to an audience by telling ONE side of th story.. I get it, he is making a killing doing this.
"That said, on this substack he only reports on left wing media hypocricy." People say the same thing to me but here's the truth, the hypocrisy is mostly on the Left because they are the "legacy media." They are the standard bearers. They are the ones who PRETEND to care about journalism and the truth but they don't. They're liars. Why would Matt bother with the side that has none of the power? I would never bother wasting my time doing that, since 99% of the coverage everywhere is about that. WHO CARES. No one does. He chases the story and the story right now, whether you want to face it or not, is what's happening with the Democrats, the media and every other institution of power they control. They are the semi-fascists. It's just that we don't have journalists to call them out because they have become a propaganda outlet for the State. Thank god for Matt.
Sasha.. Agreed on much that you are saying. The "legacy media" should be held to a higher standard. Today they are semi fascist. Totally agree..
But right wing media lies far more than 'legacy media" and they have captured the minds of close to 40% of voters. it was right wing media not legacy media that convinced 80% of Republican voters that Trump won the election and that The Mueller report exhonerated Trump. Both are flat out lies and they are as destructive of our democracy as "legacy" media not reporting honestly on the fact that Twitter was taking marching orders from the NSA during the build up to Ukraine.
Matt can't come down on both sides because he will lose his paid subscribers. One need not spend much time on this board to see where his paid subscribers come from and they are right wingers who regurgitate right wing media propaganda in almost every post.
I love Matt... I can't say i would do any different if i was him. But i am not going to fool myself. Hassan was doing exactly what Matt and Fox news do. Reporting in a manner that gives their audience what they want even if it not the FULL TRUTH..
The FULL TRUTH is that right wing media is destroying democracy every bit as much as the NYT and CNN... I can say that because it is true. Matt can't
"Right wing media lies far more than legacy media."
This is complete nonsense. Legacy media has been influenced by postmodernism and critical theory, which basically invents conclusions (race/gender, climate, Covid-19). How can you not see this? We are dealing with a top-down tyranny.
How can it be a "top down tyranny" when the FOX supported GOP controlled the House, Senate and Presidency for two full years? FOX is the #1 rated cable new channel and the love to brag about it.
Let me quote Matt's Wikipedia page on this:
<<Taibbi argues that BOTH sides of the political media spectrum are complicit in dividing the country and fueling hate.[14] In 2019, Taibbi self-published the book Hate Inc., a critique of the mainstream media landscape.[101] Reviewing the book for Paste, Jason Rhode called it a "brilliant indictment of American media", praising the majority of the book but criticized Taibbi for "[spending] a section of his book both-sidesing both MSNBC and FOX".>>
The top-down tyranny has more to do with the WEF (the Dems are 100% on board with it). I'm also referring to the progressive movement that has captured most of our institutions (science, medicine, the military, professional sports, Hollywood, most of corporate America, Silicon Valley, etc.) and the Dems, with almost no exceptions I can think of, are on board with this movement, including their allies in the media. Pointing to the reactionary lone wolf that is FOX as you so often do is a glaring false equivalent.
WT - The World Economic Forum has no leverage what so ever over American politics. So your premise is flawed from the start. The TOP when it comes to US policy is the Presidency, the House and the Senate along with the courts. All of which the GOP has controlled or controls.
Who is this "progressive movement" you are referring to? Is it Bernie Sanders and AOC who oppose corporate control of campaign financing and who are fighting to tax the rich and provide Medicare for All or are they Nancy Pelosi who is the leader at of the Democratic party and the leader extracting money from the corporations to fund Dem Campaigns. Because leaders like AOC and Sanders oppose that. and she would not even have a vote on Medicare for All when the Dems had the Sentate house and presidency? Is she the leader of this progressive movment? If so i too oppose her.
Or is the "progressive movement" Obama who's economic team decided to bail out bank share holders and protect bank executive bonuses while leaving home owners to twist in the wing during the Financial crises. Does Obama control them or do they control Obama? You can't answer that because your narrative makes no sense what so ever.
Exactly what is this "progressive" movement you refer to that controls what Hollywood, Corporate American and Silicon Valley do? It sound like you are regurgitating Rush Llimbaugh dialogue which we now know even he did not even believe because it is so fantastic.
The GOP do exactly what Corporate America tells them to do on Tax Cuts to the rich, bailing out banks, funding big oil, funding wars for big oil, denying climate change, de regulating monoplies and on and on.
Democrats gonna hire someone for the "Democrat-led destruction of the First Amendment?" Or are they gonna save money and do it themselves (democrats are notoriously cheap bastards).
I hope they know that a B&E, especially at the Library of Congress, carries stiff penalties. And you know the democrats! Once they pull out the exacto knife for the swift but brutal excision of the 1st amendment from that piece of hallowed 18th-century parchment you can kiss goodbye to the 2nd amendment as well!
history will prove him right if justice wins out. history is told by the victors, so chances are the truth will be buried and people like matt will be held up as the liars attempting to prevent progress.
Reading Substack articles is great but I also enjoy the thoughtful comments section. Twitter’s format is a dumpster fire. The comments are often hyperbolic childish drivel.
...and hateful (Twitter). I love the comments communities on Substack. People disagree with intelligence and mostly good manners. I learn a lot as well.
The challenge will be to keep it that way. Reddit was decent for awhile (about 2 minutes), then shat the bed. Even the old (!) online Bulletin Boards showed some promise until they devolved into the inevitable shitshow. It seems an inherent aspect of the internet, writ large: the digital 'public square' becomes a cacophony of every voice, shouting, all at the same time. Worrisome.
If someone calls another a s******d (or worse, say F you) I respectfully admonish them w ‘hey, this isn’t Twitter’ or ‘we don’t talk like that on Substack’. I’ve never gotten a negative reply (and I’ve rarely experienced meanness, etc on SS either). I think we should all stick together and call it out. WE are the comment’s community.
Pretty good, but not worth much if it devolves to everyone agreeing with each other. Thankfully in this Stack there are feldspar and a few others that throw some sand in the wheels to keep it from getting too harmonious.
An example is people here stating the mainstream media is cracking up or destroying itself. That usually gets a few likes. But is it true? or does it just feel good to say it?
That’s why I learn a lot. I think the mix of opinions is great. The pushback is what most of us enjoy. Repartee. It never HAS to devolve into Twitter-esque name-calling. Why should it?
Or spam... Or increasingly, advertisements. The Twitter comments section is garbage compared to Substack. In fact, I would go out on a limb and say that Substack has the best comments section of any website I've ever been on.
The old The Straight Dope was pretty good as well, but it was policed by volunteer moderators who could suspend abusive users, delete off-topic threads, or move them to a discussion thread designated for ranting and raving.
I think on most platforms, the early adopters are serious users. Once it gains a certain level of popularity, it attracts the lower common denominators: narcissists seeking attention, immature types who enjoy annoying others, one-topic ranters and ravers, etc. People who come for genuine discourse tire of the noise and leave, lowering the signal-to-noise ratio in a downward spiral.
Community policing, via shaming or ignoring, is minimally effective. Moderation works better, but is time-consuming and subject to bias. Substack, Ricochet and others have hit on a good solution: comments are only available to paying subscribers. Few trolls are willing to put their money where their mouths are.
It can be, certainly. And if you define any limitation on speech as "censorship," then absolutely, it is.
But, as discussed earlier, any unfettered forum quickly devolves into a morass of all-caps invective and hyperbole, interspersed with Lonely Singles In Your Area. Which tends to defeat the purpose of having a forum in the first place. There need to be some limitations, and some way of enforcing them.
The eternal problem, of course, is who defines those limits, and how are they enforced. For no matter where you draw the line, someone will consider it too restrictive.
FWIW, I found the Straight Dope moderators to be reasonable and to take a light touch, though I'm certain they had their biases. They are only human, after all.
The Substack / Ricochet model of opening comments only to paid subscribers seems to do a decent job of keeping the trolls at bay, without placing any limits on anyone. (Though page owners do have the power to ban people.)
Yeah, Straight Dope was my online "community" then I drifted to reddit. Now only use that for headline scanning and specific things like college football. Now it's more substack. But really I jump around more these days multiple platforms.
I agree with you about the quality of the comments on Substack.
However, if you haven't looked at Naked Capitalism (nakedcapitalism.com), I highly recommend that you do so. IMHO, it has the best commentariat with Substack a very close second. I frequently learn as much from the comments at NC as I do from the original post.
at least here, things generally stay closer the topic or something related. commenters also are more likely to take a calmer tone with each other. Twitter and Facebook just seem to have become a means for the companies to generate clicks rather than serving up interesting or useful topics/discussion. In a way, Substack is kinda like a throwback to reading a newspaper, but with an instant Letter to the Editor add on. Perfect for a slowpoke like me.
They are coming at you with the same playbook described in the excellent Sharyl Attkisson books. It's familiar and utterly predictable to see the Media Establishment go into complete attack mode against someone or something they can't control. Sucks for you of course but they don't give any real journalist much of a choice.
You've proven more than worthy of my $5/month, stay the course brother! Wishing you a Happy Easter with the family!
Also why people need to learn the difference between cultural appropriation and influence.
Without Italian directors stealing from japanese directors stealing from American directors, we wouldn't have Seven Samurai or the Magnificent Seven, or Fist Full Of Dollars.
Lol. When I lived in Russia, I tried to co-write a screenplay with one of the editors from “Don’t Sleep,” the Russian partner publication to my paper, the eXile. We were going to steal from the American directors stealing from the Italian directors stealing from the Japanese directors, and make a version of “Magnificent Seven” based on post-communist Russia, when a ton of Russian military badasses were being hired as mercenaries by gangsters. I had done a story about a former collective farm hamlet in Siberia being robbed every night by bandits…. We never quite finished it, but that “ Великолепная семерка” screenplay still exists somewhere.
There are some really enjoyable Russian Westerns AKA Osterns, Red Westerns, or best of all Borscht Westerns! out there for the viewing fellow Substackers!
Hey Matt, if one-hundredth of journalists had your work ethic, conscience, humility, and intelligence, damn, we might stand a chance. May your example inspire more of the good ones to make some noise.
And yes, Kurosawa: one of the greatest filmmakers of all time.
I’ll give Elon the benefit of the doubt and assume he considered his actions and chose a course correction. He’s always been a bit impulsive. The heterodox community needs to stick together to gain traction over the cultural insanity of our times. Hopefully Matt, Bari, and Elon will sit down over a beer and work things out.
Elon is not who I thought he was. He’s weak. He has principles and the power to live by them, but he loses his nerve. He seems to do better when politics and public opinion are not involved, like when he’s making and spending piles of his own money. Let’s hope he’s learning something in between the waffling.
I must respectfully disagree with you about Elon Musk. I think Musk, like every billionaire, is morally bankrupt. The only things they care about are money and power. If he is such a free speech warrior why does he submit to India’s and China’s censorship demands? Because he will lose huge amounts of money if he does not. I agree that he does well making and spending money, exerting his power. The same applies to all oligarchs.
Thank you for that opinion. You have a point. I was predisposed to be happy when Elon took over Twitter, but maybe I gave him too much credit for being a principled person and not enough blame for being a venal capitalist.
I listened to the pod between you and Walter yesterday and I just want you to know that you were ambushed on MSNBC and it was a disgusting, terrifying thing to see. I plan on writing more about it, how Medhi Hasan was basically doing the bidding of the Democratic Party, like a Good Soldier -- exactly like the panel who interrogated you for the Twitter Files. I know that people like me who used to be a faithful Democrat think this is somehow the good fight. But my god, can't they see what they've become? Can't they see that what they're doing is trying to stop someone from telling the truth? It remains shocking that this is where we are.
I just wanted to offer you moral support because that is what you have given me as I found myself unable to go along with what I was seeing. Finding your writing, your clarity, your objectivity, your willingness to ask questions and to be maybe the last real journalist was life saving almost, not to be dramatic. Had that never happened to me I'd be on Twitter trying to destroy you as they are all now. Destroy you so that anything you say is disregarded.
Now that they have amassed so much cultural, political and institutional power they can't stand it that there is one person out there who is willing to see them in a critical light -- which is your job. Shame on them. What a disgrace that interview was.
I hope you enjoy your vacation. You have earned it. Don't let them take even a minute of your time with your family in fretting over that stupid idiotic embarrassing interview that will one day be used as proof to show exactly how corrupt MSNBC has become, though they're far from the only ones.
Ambush is the right word. I had the same reaction when I watched the podcast.
They have a gulag waiting for you. Silent majority is too distracted by peripheral bs to notice. We are soft and cowed by a tyranny of the minority. Enjoy your family. There are some things those loonies can never take away.
Could you please provide a link to the interview podcast?
{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a597e6Wv_xg} 👀
As Usual,
EA😎
Thanks for the link. Wow, that was brutal....
Here it is. Mehdi is the guy on the bottom. https://efukt.com/20895_OMFG:_The_Dangers_Of_CBT.html
You may have been ambushed, but I would say you were sucker punched again. The first time was by Musk. You got involve with a very rich and immoral man that you are now afraid of. You allowed him to skew your data against against Dems and dictate where you published it. Why? And spare us your altruistic crap. Then you showed up totally unprepared for Husan, and he mopped the floor with you. What did you do with the brilliant Matt Taibbi that we all know and love? You really undermined your credibility and his reputation. Do you think you can survive it? I am one of your longest and biggest fans, and I’m not sure I can survive what you did.
You're onto their tactics! I thought similarly, that after the Congressional hearing, the system figured Matt hadn't been beaten (far from it--Dumbass Debbie Wasserman Schultz commented on his skyrocketing Twitter followers, demonstrating that more and more people want what Matt's telling), so this was Plan C (Plan B having been the hearing and Plan A having been what Hasan did at first: "PR work for the world's richest..."
What will Plan D be? Cause A, B, and C have sucked.
JB - Matt has been spot on. And Hassan's attack was a partisan hit job. Agreed.
But make no mistake about it. Matt had reported for years on how right wing media like FOX and NewsMax etc... push Republican propaganda and lies all day long. And Matt will NEVER EVER talk about that on this substack because if he did he would lose subscribers and thus income.
Hassan is the exact same. He had to attack Matt because if he focused on the real issue, MSA and Twitter controlling what was Tweeted, Hassan would lose audience.
Matt is great but don't fool yourself. he is no different than Hassan. Not in the least bit
8G... Matt's subscribers are only loyal to him as long as he does not turn his laser sharp reporting on right wing media. He wrote numerous times, before substack, about how media outlets like FOX and NewMax etc... lie all of the time to push the narrative of the GOP or their advertisers. Or more likely they ignore topics to keep these parties happy.
But Matt will never, ever report on that with this substack because he would lose viewers. Just like Fox had to lie about Jan 6th so they would not lose viewers (not my opinion, that is what they said under oath)/. Hassan and MSBNC are no different. They have to attack Matt because if they don't they will lose viewers.
I pay to be a member of Matt's substack. I like him. But i don't fool yourself. He is no different than FOX or MSNBC.... And his reward is that he is making a ton of money for playing the game the way the rules are laid out.
I don't think so, bro. Two things happened to channel Matt's reporting on the DNC and corporate media: 1) those two groups started aiming at independent journalists, and 2) Twitter Files dropped in his lap. You go where the story takes you. His Twitter followers went up following the start of the Twitter Files, not because he stopped attacking Fox and Newsmax. Like classic muckrakers, he goes after the powerful.
But here's some truth in advertising: all you right wing people out there who think Matt is now one of you, think again.
Or: You go where Elon Musk says to go.
JB - Matt is not one of them, when it comes to the right wingers that pray to him.
But his commitment to IGNORING right wing journalisms lies started long before the Twitter Files dropped in his lap. And his rapid growth in subs aligned directly with his attacks on the left and his IGNORING of equal hypocrisy on the right. I've been following him since before substack. I have watched it from start to end.
I get what he is doing and support him. But he is no different than Hassan or Tucker Carlson... NONE of them will do anything that turns their audience away from them in the name of 'truth and balance".
Obvious and self-evident—if you’re honest about the thing.
Who here "prays" to him?
The majority of posters on this board pray to the God of right wing journalism like FOX and NewsMax and The Daily Wire etc... Evidence: They regurgitate that media's half truths and spin like its gospel on these boards.
And they ignore and are uninformed on the issues that the rest of the world really cares about like wages and health care and poverty and corp greed etc... because those media ignore such topics exactly as Chomsky articulated in Manufacturing Consent and in the intro to Matts book Hate Inc...
8G - Agreed, what Hassan did was not professional. Agreed liberal media has serious problems.
Sadly, right wing media has been doing this for generations now and has produced generations of misinformed voters. Misinformed on everything from the 2020 election results to tax cuts to the rich to universal health care the list goes on and on... The left is a mess. The right has produced generations of misinformed and angry voters.
Do I have this correct?
The 'Right' has done it (propaganda), so now shedding light on how the 'Left' is doing it (arguably worse) is less legitimate. Becuz?
Seems some serious mental gymnastics there, bud.
If I report on a bank robbery on Main St in Anytown, USA, is it less of a story because I didnt report on ALL bank robberies in Everytown USA?
TWC - Not what i was saying or think. Not even close.
It is the people on this board that are crystal clear that because Matt accurately calls out the liberal media for pushing corporate and government propaganda that "therefore" right wing propaganda (Fox, NewsMax, Daily Wire et al...) are CORRECT in their rhetoric and reporting.
How do i know such a large # of the people posting on this board think that? Because the regurgitate the half truths (Climate change is a hoax, government is the problem, Trump isn't misinformed etc..) along with the flat out lies (we don't really know who won the 2020 election, Trumps tax cuts helped the economy, deregulation is good for the economy, we can't afford Universal Health care etc...) and of course they never even mention the things the right wing pols don't want discussed like Child Poverty in the US, Out of Control Military Spending, Corporate Control of law makers etc....)
So yes, most people on this message board think that because Matt wont touch on right wing media propaganda on his substack the way he did in his book they are free to consume and trust it.
How about you?
8G... I hear what you are saying and do not disagree that "liberal media has taken it to the next level"
I also agree that the media is controlled by the Oligarchs to serve their own interests. That has been common through out the history of democracy going back to the Greeks.
Two issues:
(1) Right wing media has equaled and surpassed "liberal media" in the area of pushing propaganda. First it ignores the issues Americans truly care about like wages declines, health care, the environment, eduction and corporate greed. Second it has created astonishingly misinformed viewers on everything from climate change, to tax cuts to the rich helping the economy to "stop the steal".
(2) While oligarchs have controlled the press going back to the Greeks that is not how it always has been been. There have been exceptions. And when we have those exceptions then Democracy thrives and when we don't have those exceptions democracy wilts.
It is clear from the posters on Matts board that the vast majority buy into Right Wing Corporate/ oligarch funded media lies and half truths. And any time Matt challenges that form of Media, as he did in his book Hate Inc. he is going to lose followers / subscribers.
So, like Fox news on "stop the steal", (per court documents) on this substack Matt is going to tell his subscribers what they want to hear and ignore all else. He sold very few copies of "Hate Inc" where he told both sides. He has made a small fortune doing what Fox does, telling his subscribers ONLY what they want to hear. Do you disagree?
Medhi H. was often WRONG in his line of questioning, but this was hardly an ad hominem attack interview. I have subscribed to Taibbi for FOUR YEARS, but that doesn't make me any more likely to parrot pro-Taibbi tribal bullshit than I am to parrot the US elite's tribal bullshit.
Hasan's first question: "Why do you believe these Twitter files are so important, and what should our viewers know about what's in them?"
Second point, cites agreement that FBI spends too much time and effort on social media efforts.
Third point: "Does your reporting show evidence of government censorship? I don't think so." Shows Biden *campaign* requests, points out they are not government. Says that the tweets in question also were to take down Hunter Biden near nudes or whatever, violation of twitter terms of service. Asks if Taibbi "didn't know [that] in which case that's kind of incompetent, or if he was hiding that fact". Matt goes on tirade about how MSNBC is incompetent and always has been.
That's true, but it was non-responsive to the point. Especially since a minute later Matt says he DID know that was the content "of course". So the IF from Hasan's construction is not held and he's not even calling Taibbi incompetent in the first place, he's simply accusing him of hiding something, which is fair.
To sum up: this was an interview with challenging questions, and Hasan embarassed himself later with false premises in some of those challenging questions. A better prepared Taibbi would have eviscerated him on the spot, and Hasan was later eviscerated on Twitter and shown to have no clothes. However, Taibbi's stance that this was an ad hominem attack interview is off base.
Yes, journalism is in trouble and Matt is one of the last practicing good journalism.
I would say Matt wasn't ready for the exact questions but you can never be that far in the weeds on everything they might ask walking in. But Matt needs to get lessons from Jordan Peterson on how to handle such contentious situations overall, I think.
Honestly Matt walked in combative with a chip on his shoulder. His seemingly triggered response to everything asked didn't serve him well. He could have answered everything simply straight up and calmly, and he would have come off a lot better.
In contrast to this, Matt did great in the Congressional hearing and came off spectacularly. Maybe the attacks are wearing on him. They certainly did on Peterson, given his eventual illness and need for a break.
@ Sasha Stone - RioRosie - Rebecca Lee - Kelly Green - et al⁉
First of all this sub-thread, originated by Sasha Stone, should not be subjected to uninformed opinions by anyone not willing to familiarize themselves with the factual, readily available, substance of the discussion
and its origins between Medhi Hasan and Matt Taiibi. {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a597e6Wv_xg} 👀
A discussion that ostensibly only occurred on MSNBC because Mr. Hasan wanted to disparage both Mr. Taiibi's association with Elon Musk, and Mr. Musk's alleged hypocrisy over a matter in India on Twitter.🐍🧪
Mr. Taiibi seemed to be surprised by Mr. Hasan's aggressive interruptions and obsessive interrogation into matters that had nothing to do with his "Twitter Files" investigative reporting; behaviors very similar to the biased political posturing he had experienced when attempting to provide informed testimony at the recent Congressional hearing.☣🕸
As Usual,
EA☠
If uninformed opinions are not needed, you can simply hold your tongue. I literally wrote out Hasan's first three comments, so clearly I don't need your link to the video. All three comments are relevant to the Twitter files, falsifying your "nothing to do with" construction.
Couldn't agree more that Hasan's goal was to disparage, but asking tough questions about the matters at hand is in bounds, unless we're going to both be annoyed that journalism is dead and then not call that journalism?
@Kelly Green on 10 Apr🐍🧪
The opening comment in my reply to Sasha et al earlier, regarding uninformed opinions, addressed Rebecca Lee's candid honesty relating that she had not viewed the debate; I had no intention of impugning or contesting your familiarity with the topic🕸⁉
As far as your snarky misconstrued understanding❔, and resultant "tongue" lashing is concerned, thank you for making me aware of your comprehensive reading skills.👩🏫
Got it, apologies for the misunderstanding!
Matt is a great journalist. But he is no different than FOX or MSNBC... The evidence is irrefutable, FOX admits they pushed Trumps Jan 6th lie, not because they thought it was true, but because if they did not push it they would lose audience share.
Matt is a great journalist and Hassan unfairly attacked him, but he does the same thing on this substack. He attacks liberal media like CNN and NYT, accurately, for pushing false narratives while IGNORING right wing media pushing false narratives ("Stop the steal" "Tax cuts to the rich trickle down to the poor" "Russia Gate" "Vaccines" etc....) every day.
Matt wont point to right wing media lying like CNN and the NYT for the same reason Hassan would not be fair to Tiabbi. In both cases they only tell half of the truth because if they told the whole truth they would lose audience share.
I love Matt but i dont see how he is any different than Hassan. he's not!
The evidence is often very refutable. For example, this was a semi-famous moment for Tucker Carlson, who publicly called out Sidney Powell's BS even though because of more recent false narratives, you believe that he publicly touted them. He did not: https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/11/20/tucker-carlson-gives-update-after-backlash-over-sidney-powell-segment/6367629002/
Matt is different from Hasan in that he gets it right 90% of the time and cares to get it right 95% of the time. Hasan only wants to make his points and got much very very wrong.
KG -
Getting it right 95% of the time does not mean one is not pushing propaganda. Read Manufacturing Concent. It's not about getting it right nearly as much as it is about putting the right context around it.
Hassan was wrong because he IGNORED the meat of the Twitter files, which was NSA involvement with Twitter content publishing. Not the 3 petty errors Matt made.
Matt is spot on with his attacks on the left and their journalists. But he now IGNORES the media on the right's endless lies and ignoring of context and parroting what the RNC wants them to say.
He called it out before this substack. Now he ignores it because it would reduce his number of subscribers. Just like FOX reporting on Jan 6th and th stop the steal LIE Trump was pushing. Carlson calling out one of Powells lies and then still talking 95% of the time about how the LIE is justified is "text book" propaganda.. Read Manufacturing Concent. Matt has and used to quote it all of the time.
Matt and Chomsky are hated by the left.. I get it. Neither supports the right t and their lies either. they both think Right wing media lies so much they need not even talk about. But they both think the people that fall for that media are well..... You know that, right?
No. Taibbi isnt IGNORING ANYTHING. He's reporting on SOMETHING, just not on everything. This.is absurd logic. See: Red Herring, strawman, context collapse, et al
Matt's reasons for writing less on that stuff could be a simple as being busier with what's on his plate. If you are perceived as favorable to certain stories, you may get access to more of those stories. I don't think less of Glenn Greenwald because after Snowden came to him he paid less attention to other things he used to report on before that. You have ZERO basis for claiming that Taibbi's focus is shifting for financial gain.
And nobody said that getting it right 95% of the time meant that. I said it was a difference, so of course they could share that feature. Hasan (one s) pushes BS with zero fidelity to the facts, a major difference. Having a fact-based opinion that you spotlight is very different. Matt bends stuff, particularly when he's covering the business world where he's honestly not very savvy, but he works hard on fidelity to the truth and that's worth a lot.
Tiabbi wrote an entire book on media hypocrisy and found the time to report on the right and left equally. Read it, its called Hate Inc. And when he did that his audience was far smaller than it was when he shifted to reporting to only media on the left.
When he pivoted to revealing only the left his audience exploded. That is how he bacame so big on Substack. And that is why Musk chose him to drop the twitter files, which again blew up his audience.
Yes, there is irrefutable evidence that he is making FAR more money from his one sided substack reporting only on the left media than he ever made with books like HATE INC which focus on the hypocricy of the both the left and right media.
Good for you to see the media rot coming from the DNC-aligned media. I'm sure that some of your old "faithful Democrat" acquaintances now regard you as ultra-MAGA hatemonger just for pointing out clear bad-faith and biased coverage. For many of us, we don't trust the conservative-leaning media much either but the blatant unrepentant lying coming from our traditional "unbiased" media needs to be resisted with that much more force.
No one wants this fight. I'm sure Taibbi doesn't, but when one party is continuously bullying you there isn't much of a choice.
Hunter S would be proud of Matt...wish he and a few others
(Hitchens!) were still around to throw some punches.
Hitches was fallible. He was a stooge for the 2003 Iraqi Invasion.
Everyone is fallible—isn’t that the whole point?
Just dropping in to say that THIS comment needs to be amplified; it's so important that we recognize that human aspect in one another, and more importantly in those we admire.
Most definitely.
Fallible? He was a showboat and a fraud. An average mind burnished to a high polish by education and ambition.
As Chris Hedges said after a debate with Hedges he was a bully. Michael Parenti said the same, and both of those fine men clearly prevailed in both knowledge and insight. Meanwhile Hitchens crowed more loudly and drew crowds, who were overly impressed by a man who overly impressed with himself. His excuse for supporting the Iraq invasion was that the world was better off without Sadam Hussein. These are the reasons that LeCarre called him an odious twerp, and that Gore Vidal laughed when someone asked if Hitchens was his “heir apparent”.
Actually, Vidal at one point did anoint Hitchens as his "heir apparent" and only rescinded the consecration when Hitchens lurched to the right, leant his support to the Iraq war, and joined the "crackpot" chorus who challenged the Bush administration's version of 9/11 with a buffet of conspiracy theories.
And yet Hedges would side vociferously with Hitchens on this issue. In theory, ofc...since Hitch isnt around for this shitshow
Agreeing with someone on one issue is about as meaningful as ordering the same thing for lunch. Of course there were overlaps. But to me there’s no coming back from Hitchens’ support of the illegal, criminal, and inhuman invasion of a country based on lies. If Hitchens had half the intellect he pretended to have he’d have known all of that. As a thinker he was made utterly irrelevant by this. But we still have Sam Harris quoting his man “Hitch” while ignoring that half of his famous witticisms were used long before he pretended to have witted them. (The “free will” one goes back at least to Bertrand Russell).
As for Hedges, I’m deeply moved by his courage and resolve; I’m grateful to live in the same world as him. The idea that Gore Vidal would have considered anyone his heir show no understanding of the man on any level.
Please excuse inappropriate tirade. I was really just trying to spare Mr. Taibbi the taint of an unworthy association. He’s worth a dozen Hitchinsesses. Peace.
No apologies necessary, or warranted. You bring up solid points in criticism of Hitchens, which many have pointed to numerous times, incl myself. Also, agreed Taibbi is invaluable to us. Its unbelievable that Hasan invoked Chomsky re: lies of omission being a tool of propaganda. Truly Bizarro world...
Just a funny coda to this subject. On Bill Maher’s Club Random podcast Fran Liebowitz had some very unkind words for Hitchins ending with: “Name one woman who was his friend. You can’t, there weren’t any.(Paraphrased). I will say this in his favor, he seems to have been excellent company, and a very good friend, to men anyway.
Well, whatever. No doubt others have some unkind words for Liebowitz as well. She exemplifies the disingenuous poseur: sound & fury, signifying nothing.
"The idea that Gore Vidal would have considered anyone his heir" was Vidal's idea, so you're effectively arguing that Vidal lacked a degree of self-awareness and might also have been marked by moments of high grandiosity, which is not a bad argument to make at all.
As a former CivNat Normie I think you have struck a balance here
Yes, no excuse for that blunder.
George Carlin too.
Why Orwell Matters, c. Hitchens. Read it! We all must explore…we are all fallible…even the brilliant…
The “fight” must be fought
These people know no other way
Irrational
Manipulative
Very destructive.
Sasha & Taibbi are - an impressive confluence.
I lean conservative, but have a great deal of respect for real “classical” Liberals. Keep at it Matt, don’t let them use your integrity to trap you again. Shrug it off.
Real issue is how do we use your work to help make things right again. What do we do now? How can we fight back? Why the hell are Dems still doing well in critical elections, despite all of the serious crap that they are pushing? I just don’t understand, where are all of the good people? Standing around watching?
They have been in charge of educating our youth for quite some time now and the 18-25 years old generally are the easiest to motivate to vote of our entire population. They are the largest voting block out there and very easy to manipulate since politically they are not very smart. When an election cycle gets down to the general election the liberal teachers scare the kids over some topic and then the colleges all turn out and vote 90-95% of their populations.
Good point. Also, I think the GOP needs to be more pragmatic about abortion.
I think most Americans want lots of leeway in the 1st trimester, strong restrictions in the 2nd tri, near total prohibition during the 3rd tri - and no partial birth abortions.
Politics means compromise & trying to understand why others think differently; not shoving your beliefs on other people. Wake-up GOP, for America’s sake.
My thought exactly, on abortion. I think it’s wrong, but also realize we’re suckers for any technological solution that works for our convenience, as abortion does. So, Republicans are forever hung up on that—in the meantime, Democrats will sweep next time, and probably outlaw the Republicans (Constitution means nothing to them). And guess what? Abortion will be made federally legal! Republicans seem to have no sense how high the stakes are.
Politics means compromise, I agree. Except that whatever this racket is in the U.S. seems to largely be about taking extreme positions in order to get votes because extreme positions are better at getting attention.
Politics has long been described as the game of choosing sides. Hardly any room for compromise with politics. I believe it's more accurate to say that governing is the act of compromise. Politics and governance are two separate things.
Midterm elections proved this. Voters were willing to look past rising crime, inflation, insane covid response, etc, and instead prioritized abortion rights. Your breakdown of compromise by trimester is perfectly reasonable to me, but it’s clear if you really listen to conservative media, many are willing to sacrifice all their political capital towards outlawing it completely.
We’re stuck on this Dem led runaway train until GOP does a full reboot of their policies. I figure we’ve got some tough years ahead.
A theme in the thread below is the youth vote. Yes, they are brainwashed and gullible but they vote when aggrieved and like it or not, fellow conservatives, the very thought of limiting abortion pisses them right out of their pants. They cannot see moral issues in anything in life yet -- they are stuck in perpetural adolesence, even when well past their twenties -- and the Dems will play the abortion game no matter what. Live your morality, beloved fellow right-to-lifers, but shut the hell up on abortion. We got rid of Roe.
One more thing: Remember when some of us warned years ago that the gay movement wouldn't stop simply at tolerance or fairness or domestic partnership protections but wanted the full monty of marriage while still winking at promiscuity? Well gay marriage is now the law. The left/female/youth/suburban mom sees us on abortion the same way...it's the camel's nose under the tent...we got rid of Roe but now we want a total outlawing. If you wish to pursue that we will never see the White House again. They are better armed in this war than we are. Maybe not in the next life, but in this one.
Except that truth should always be the goal. Otherwise we end up with arbitrary definitions of life. This is the fodder of those that trend toward what serves them best. We do live in a system of laws that put truth at a premium. Thankfully, in our lawful society, there are penalties for taking another’s life for social or economic reasons. In many states pregnant mothers are carved out of these laws by not recognizing the pre-born baby as a life. This is a necessary recognition (that it is not a life), otherwise it would be criminal under the law. Physicians should not be criminalized for performing an act that is legal, we agree, and we may have debate…but not on what constitutes life. The question is simply whether the law sees that first trimester baby as a living being with rights or not. Biologically there is no question that it is an alive human, but the law can define whether it has rights in a variety of ways as the variability in our Federalist nation shows. No matter what state you reside in, though, It is fact that an OB/GYN is taking care of two lives when they care for a pregnant patient, which is why at conception, if the mother is on medication that may be harmful to the baby they adjust, change, or discontinue those medication‘s. Likewise, if that fetus were not life, there would be no need for physician intervention. Having witnessed a 15 week termination under ultrasound surveillance in medical school, my view on this changed forever. I am proud to be a healer, who values and respects life. I recognize with empathy the suffering of a mother who is pregnant with an unwanted child, but I hold that in a different balance than those who believe that termination of a healthy fetus is “reproductive health”. Just saying…politics do not justify ends for the means for some of us. I sleep better at night knowing this and I am grateful for not having sold my soul to the devil for a mob.
I think the GOP is wise to let the states shake things out for themselves and abide by what the voters endorse in referendums, if it is a state where there is not a clear cultural consensus-like Kansas and Wisconsin, where the voters kept abortion in a limited form. Let California be California and Alabama be Alabama-that’s what the Constution says (or doesn’t explicitly say) on the matter.
Tammy Bruce had a book out quite some time ago called The Death of Right and Wrong. In it she explains the urgency of the far left getting control of the schools and the kids. My family laughed at her “dramatization” but as the years have gone by what she warned about has come to fruition.
"Tammy Bruce had a book out quite some time ago called The Death of Right and Wrong. In it she explains the urgency of the far left getting control of the schools and the kids. My family laughed at her “dramatization” but as the years have gone by what she warned about has come to fruition."
As James Lindsay points out for the Left (Progressives) there is no Right or Wrong there is only Power. They reject even the idea of Absolute Truth. There is only Power.
BTW this is a really Really REALLY Bad idea. Putting my Christian hat on..this comes Right From The Pit Of Hell.
If I may Suggest
The West: The Genius of Western Civilisation. A 6-part series produced by the New Culture Forum
Updated yesterday
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEszGtr8C896sZi2J3zfRw7YGfm8WCZgt
I would increase that to 18-35 years old IMO
While I agree I was pointing when the Liberal teachers are basically still controlling the ideals of their kids. The college aged voting block gets manipulated very easily.
Oh, to be so young and so smart again.
I’ve appreciated Matt since he appeared on Imus. He and my kween Sasha remind me of my dear liberal friends in college. They were passionate Kennedy supporters in 1980, but they respected my cultish devotion to Reagan. Imagine cracking playful jokes about opposing candidates with folks. It happened. 🤷🏻♂️
Good people?
Oxymoron
Supporting this madness is not “good”
Dangerous ideas and ideals they have.
We are out here wondering how to help as well!!
I have a slate of modern heroes defined by a new paradigm of truth and courage in a world sliding into totalitarian control. (You, Kheriaty, Battacharya, O’Keefe, Kuldorff, Greenwald just to name a few). You have placed your livelihoods on the line. I know there are business decisions, but it feels as though the Cabal got to Musk. This is frightening. The Cabal is supported by the corruptocrats and the lowering of eyes of cowards. They justify their hypocrisy with word salads and lies. Hasan is one such. Once you are attune to seeing it, like Winston did in Orwell’s 1984, you can recognize it immediately. Trump will get convicted and then later turned over on appeal, but the message will be clear to the rank and file Americans that the system is rigged against them. He will lose in 2024, and our Constitutional republic will lose along with him. The process (wielded by our “democratic” government) is the punishment and this is a clear totalitarian tactic. You shined a light on that and it has put you in the Cabal’s cross-hairs. You are truly courageous!! Keep up the good fight no matter how futile it may seem at times. We are with you and our children are worth it. As the Easter/Passover season signifies, doing the right thing when it is difficult always involves suffering. THANKS FOR YOUR COURAGE, Mr. Taibbi!
Please do not forget the great Caitlin Johnstone's journalism. https://caitlinjohnstone.com/
She ranks up there with Matt, Julian, and Glenn.
Agreed!
Caitlin Johnstone is a psyop from a distant star system yet undetected by astronomers.
She might be a star child, but she's no psyop.
"He will lose in 2024"
We'll see. He may not even win the nomination.
They know only sleight of hand and deception.
"I listened to the pod between you and Walter yesterday and I just want you to know that you were ambushed on MSNBC"
What A Shock! "The Televised Mental Institution" (Dave Rubin) Ambushed someone they don't like.
So what did we learn from this (I mean other than MSNBC is a bunch of scum bags)? Know you will be attacked, treated unfairly. Know they're goal is Not to find the truth and inform their viewers. That mean Have Your Ducks In A Row.
"That mean Have Your Ducks In A Row."
When I 1st went online (1998) on Free Republic I made a statement. Shortly there after I was "taken to the woodshed", one person asked a for my source to back up what I said. Lesson Learned. Since then don't make statement Without sources (the more the merrier) to back up what I say.
Hassan has a book called "How to Win Every Argument".
The problem is that with an argument, you are trying to determine WHO is right. With a discussion, you are trying to determine WHAT is right.
A perfect example of the latter is America This Week. So ignore the glitzy marketing for a book that will screw up your life. Avoid argumentative people and save your time for people willing to have a constructive discussion.
These people are psychologically deeply impaired.
Monsters in thought word and actions
Do not engage with them.
Your post says everything that needs to be said and says it well. We are all with you, Matt. Every step of the way.
No, they cannot see, because they dont WANT to.. Motivated reasoning is a helluva drug, and these folks are vastly more illiberal than those they unabashedly paint as the demons they wish them to be. By orders of magnitude. As has been noted, this is a hyperdriven, secular religion (neé cult). They (Hasan, Maddow, et al) are appointed the Priesthood, and, to further the analogy, are abusing those very acolytes who are their congregation. This is bad...real bad. I dont see a way out.
So anybody who dares scrutinize Taibbi's work is now an agent in service to the democratic party?
Go on Twitter and look at the trending topic of Matt's name. Read those blue check assholes and you tell me if that counts as "scrutinizing." This is attempting to destroy and discredit him. Also hilarious that he's the subject instead of, you know, the ADMINISTRATIVE STATE monitoring the thoughts and speech of its citizens. Hang your heads in shame.
Much worse happened to DJT and and the journalists stood by. Now they're fleeing a sinking ship called MSM. Matt will survive and he'll be an even better writer.
I should think that if the entire MSM capsizes it might raise sea levels and cause significant coastal flooding. So that's a positive outcome, no?
DRT?
I was listening to the guys from Due Dissidence and Russel was interviewing some protesters at the Trump clown show and he questioned them on should Bush be charged with war crimes??well the reaction was nuts blowing horns and just making lots of noise to shut him down .My point is Russel said these democrats are the same people that would watch the Msm and there is no getting through to these idiots just a waste of your precious time Matt.
I already have checked Twitter and read the Taibbi/Musk threads. And I would say, yes, the heightened and animated interest of the tweeters in the taibbi/musk dust-up passes for scrutiny of Mr. Taibbi's work. And a handful of "blue check assholes" on Twitter couldn't possibly have the ability (or power) to destroy or discredit Taibbi or any other public figure.
Not sure about the hilarity of it all but you do have company in detecting a comic element to the whole affair. Many of Taibbi's Twitter critics have expressed their opinion that it is both amusing and ironic that Mr. Taibbi was shown the door (doors?) by the same creep that opened the door in the first place, so to speak.
Pick a subject, any subject, and you will find a multitude of conflicting opinions and assessments.
I have never been on Twitter; even for Twitter Files. But I sort of believed what was being laid out in the Twitter Files must be be revolutionary; I believed it could be great.
But now this supposed deal about MTaibbi v. Musk is again, the way TPTB dismiss tiny challenges. They will smear both sides multiplied by 5.
Neither righteous side should take their bait. And neither should we. Prove it. Whatever you are offering.
Scrutinize? That's what you call it when the entire media comes out and demonizes Matt? I have yet to hear one solid argument other than MSM to go after Matt's character . Sasha says it best.
Most of the "entire media" ignores Matt and don't have him on their radar. Substack, like twitter, is not real life. Sorry.
They don't scrutinize. They ignore the substance of Matt's work and concentrate on attacking him, as the messenger.
Why do you think that is?
Sort of obvious, isn't it?
I'm suggesting that a good many of Taibbi's critics believe there is little substance to Taibbi's work. A good many critics also believe that any scorn directed Taibbi's way is more than justified by his decision to work with someone like Elon Musk in the manner in which he did and that this assessment is more than justified by the manner in which his professional relationship with Mr. Musk came crashing down.
They're not ignoring the substance of the work. Their opinion and judgment of Taibbi's work is inextricably tethered to their judgment and lack of faith in Mr. Taibbi's journalistic practices ---it's their belief that the work is disingenuous junk.
Everybody with a brain can see that Democrats simply ignore or attack whatever is inconvenient. The idea that they're incredibly principled but don't think the story is big is laughable.
They know they will be fired if they stop toeing the line, and they will simply be replaced by somebody who will.
I'm not referring to democrats. You got democrats on the brain, bud. That can't be pleasant. So, you don't think there's a possibility that Taibbi might be a little bit full of shit? You don't find it odd that Taibbi has essentially been writing the same story over and over for the last 6-7 years? At the expense of all other issues? Oh, sure, it's the 1st amendment, freedom of speech, yada, yada, yada--it's important-- what American could argue that it isn't an important issue?
But if taibbi is going to focus on the same subject exclusively, why not provide a little context? We're at war, a new kind of war---a cyber war between competing nations consisting of skillfully devised campaigns of propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, designer psyops from intel agencies around the world so sophisticated in their subtlety that they're less detectable than the air around us. I think taking at least a short stroll down this avenue to be of a piece with exploring domestic incursions into social media by the the U.S. spy network. No?
Alas, the problem is far more extensive and insidious than Taibbi's one-man spelunking can even begin to convey. I don't mean to make light of it, but is there really anybody here surprised that the U.S. intelligence network is monitoring social media for all kinds of monsters and hobgoblins, foreign and domestic? And are sloppy and disingenuous about it and lie and prevaricate and suggest that it's none of your goddamn business what we're doing? Wouldn't it actually be a surprise if they weren't doing all this snooping? And then there's the weird Racket meme that it's a DEMOCRAT PROJECT TO GUT THE 1ST AMENDMENT AND ENSLAVE ALL AMERICANS. Huh-huh. The real deep state laughs out loud at that one.
I'd like to see an attempt at explaining what some of this means for the average citizen in our daily lives. Or the geopolitical ramifications of every major power training cameras and microphones on every square foot of real estate on earth. We know most of it is illegal. Big deal. Governments specialize in illegal. Illegal is the one thing governments do well and so keep on doing it. What does our government want for us? And then of course what do they want from us?
What are we---kids? What I'd like to hear or read is some sort of context for all of this. Is Donald Trump up to his knees in Russian influence? Of course he is. Has been for at least 30 years, if you've been paying attention. Did the democrats and press irresponsibly blow a gasket over Trump's surprise election? Of course they did.
There's a small cohort in the media and elsewhere that hypothesize that Taibbi is actually working for one of the alphabet agencies because he's writing about the same shit every week ad nauseam. And has glaring omissions in most of his reporting. That there's a quid pro quo. And then taking a reportorial handout from a psychopath like Musk that can only be viewed as a propaganda project and maybe even a psyop on the part of Musk.
Musk is a weird dude who loves chaos and is capable of conjuring vast quantities of it and that was unquestionably not a good decision on the part of Mr. Taibbi to engage with Musk, especially on THAT project. Whatever else a lot of money can buy, it can buy a lot of chaos.
And this whole break-up between Taibbi and Musk and Musk's accusation that Taibbi is an "employee of substack." How absurd is that? And then I think: to me that sorta sounds like Musk shorthand for "substack is in bed with the government and Taibbi is big cheese at substack"...and, and, and...Might mark the beginning of a brand new Musk psyop dreamed up on the spot in the shower. Watch for it!
Most of the rest of the world is either indifferent towards the "twitter files" or dismiss it as a hot mess of nonsense with a dash of meaninglessness. Mostly they just don't give a shit one way or another. It's effect on the civilized nations of the world is nil. The rest of the world: can't live with'em, can't live without'em.
We now live in a theatre of the absurd.
Harold Pinter would agree.
All I know for sure is that my "Birthday Party" is coming soon. For me, and for us all.
Stanley---careful with Goldberg and McCann at the party.
Feldspar, have you read any of Matt Taibbi's books? To suggest that he's a one trick pony is absurd and invalidates the many, many, many, many words you wrote after that. He spent weeks covering school board issues in Loudon County Va. that was critical to the Senate elections where Yonkin pulled a big upset. But I guess you don't REALLY read Taibbi's work. If you did, you'd know what you wrote is wrong!
One-trick pony has an ideological definition also. Wasn't always a one-trick pony if that's what you're laboring to point out.
If you looked up the word Obtuse in the dictionary, it would probably have your picture. I didn't have to "labor" very hard to show the fallacy of your argument. It amazes me how some people can string two sentences together with lots of words, that make absolutely no sense. You clearly said that MT is a "one trick pony" by saying that he's been hammering this one issue for 6-7 years. I gave you FACTS that prove you wrong. So, end of story. You can stop looking foolish now. Bye!
I don't agree. It's a simple search for truth as I view this from the cheap seats. If the pursuit of truth sometimes involves working with Elon, so be it. We can't all agree, all the time. I believe there's an objective reality, perhaps more nuanced but it does exist but may be interpreted from different points of view (e.g. some see Trump as a grifter, others don't care and focus on his policies). What I find interesting is the ongoing gaslighting when one side attempts to proffer a POV that is very real - you know, the reality that cities were burning via "peaceful protesting" or the "worst attack on democracy since the Civil War" (Jan 6). For some reason, both sides prefer to point only to their interpretation and we can't have a rational argument. I do think Matt is attempting to show objective truth. If you don't like it...you are free to disagree and we can continue to have nice chats. To suggest he's a one trick pony misses the mark by far. He reports on a wide range of issues and has been reliably consistent. Unlike, say, the NYT, WSJ or WaPost.
And BTW, your words: "But if taibbi is going to focus on the same subject exclusively". And: "You don't find it odd that Taibbi has essentially been writing the same story over and over for the last 6-7 years?"
No one had to tell me that social media is the playground of the deep state.
That's just life in The Village
Of course it is!
Number Six: Where am I?
Number Two (not identified as yet): In the village.
Six: What do you want?
Two: Information.
Six: Whose side are you on?
Two: That would be telling. We want information...information... information!!!
Six: You won't get it!
Two: By hook or by crook, we will.
Six: Who are you?
Two: The new Number Two.
Six: Who is Number One?
Two: You are Number Six.
Six (running on the Village's beach): I am not a number; I am a free man!!!
Two: [Laughter]
Marr: “How can you know that I’m self-censoring? How can you know that journalists are..”
Chomsky: “I’m not saying your self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”
Full text and video here: http://scratchindog.blogspot.com/2015/07/transcript-of-interview-between-noam.html
Here is a quote from the Orwell article that Chomsky mentions.
“Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news — things which on their own merits would get the big headlines-being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralised, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.”
― George Orwell, Animal Farm
Well, that's just like, you know, their opinion, man. - The Dude
In this case, those are words of wisdom.
It isn't even an opinion. It is its marching orders.
The left is going gangbusters to discredit Taibbi, not surprising as they now how complicit they are.
nein der Marschbefehl
"Gangbusters." That was an indispensable piece of my grandmother's vocabulary.
Obviously you don't follow Taibbi's work
Exactly. 100% Correct. Thank you.
Or perhaps I'm just interpreting it differently. What's there and not there.
No, but most are.
Interesting how a crude bot-like response can be so successful at distracting.
The Twitter files, along with Jacob Siegel work, are having a monumental impact. The real question is what can we do about it.
Ignore the clever fleas.
Where is this "monumental impact"?
Serious question.
Snowden came and went.
No effect.
Same with Assange.
The most that the average citizen of the empire could tell you about Julian is that he has "smelly socks" and he's a "cat abuser.
The Empire is "this close" to war ON Russia, censorship and deep state disinfo is on full blast, and most Americans, Canadians and Brits are blissfully unaware of it all. Try and tell them otherwise, and like the finely conditioned tools that they are, they will name call you, laugh, ridicule and then report you.
Monumental impact on whom? An honest query from your bot-like correspondent.
Yeah, you don't pass the Turing test. Your programmers still have a ways to go.
Ya, well, I think I'm doin' pretty good considering I'm down an algorithm or two.
Or a troll. Bot/Troll. Same thing.
I just asked that question and a few more.
No. The entirety of the "scrutiny" was a series of logical fallacies. Matt, along with Schellenberger, Woodhouse, Rogan, and a small coterie of honest people, are showing how what passes as the media in the US had been corrupted by the IC establishment. How that group worked against the interests and rights of the people who fund it. This scares the piss out of the Mandarin class, as it shows how little worth they actually provide.
feldspar is AI…if you liked him/her hahahaha…and I suggest reading a book. “Don’t respond” is my analog suggestion to the rest of you.
Really? Prove it.
And you're a doctor? Really?
Prove it.
At this point, being a loyal supporter of either major party requires leaving your mind and/or decency at the door.
Excellent post Sasha & will be subscribing
I agree w all of the above.
My only disappointment was a comment I made to Elon on Twitter obv didn’t come true.. that was that “Matt is on vacation and hopefully someone will throw his phone into the ocean!” 😂😂😂💕💕💕💕
🤙Aloha🤙
Well said!
Yes Hassan's interview was an ambush of Matt. Totally unfair because he ignored the point of the Twitter files, which was the NSA telling Twitter what to publish and not publish.
But Matt never, ever publishes stories on right wing media like Fox News, NewMax etc... pushing Republican lies and corporate lies daily. He knows they do it. He has written about it on the past.
But today he ignores that because if he did he would lose a large piece of his, Democrat hating, audience. If Hassan did not IGNORE/ underplay that NSA involvement part of the Twitter files then he too would not be telling his audience what they want to hear and, like Matt would lose a large piece of his audience.
How is Hassan any different than Matt ignoring right wing media lies? That I dont get?
There is no scenario in which Matt Taibbi would have Medhi Hassan on his show and use it as an opportunity to talk over him, smear his character, attempt to humiliate him and then put all of his favorite "beat downs" on Twitter. Why wouldn't he do that? Because unlike Hassan, Matt is not a partisan. He would never engage in that kind of team sport. Hassan was like Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the rest of the IDIOTIC PANEL in Congress that did exactly the same thing. The idea that this all should be partisan is only because the Democrats see Elon Musk as a clear and present threat to their power. Destroying Taibbi is a way to discredit any influence Musk might have. It's such a sick ugly game. I'm so glad not to be part of it.
I agree that Matt would never have Hassaon his show and do a beat down like that.
And given i have been reading Matt since he wrote "The Divide" back in 2014 I know he is no conservative.
That said, on this substack he only reports on left wing media hypocricy. In his book, Hate Inc. he reported about hypocricy on the left and the right.
So no, he is not a partisan. But on this substacks he ignores right wing media hypocricy. And for good reason. If he wrote about it, like he did in Hate Inc.. he would lose most of his paid subscribers.
That is how he is no different than Hassan. They are both appealing to an audience by telling ONE side of th story.. I get it, he is making a killing doing this.
"That said, on this substack he only reports on left wing media hypocricy." People say the same thing to me but here's the truth, the hypocrisy is mostly on the Left because they are the "legacy media." They are the standard bearers. They are the ones who PRETEND to care about journalism and the truth but they don't. They're liars. Why would Matt bother with the side that has none of the power? I would never bother wasting my time doing that, since 99% of the coverage everywhere is about that. WHO CARES. No one does. He chases the story and the story right now, whether you want to face it or not, is what's happening with the Democrats, the media and every other institution of power they control. They are the semi-fascists. It's just that we don't have journalists to call them out because they have become a propaganda outlet for the State. Thank god for Matt.
Sasha.. Agreed on much that you are saying. The "legacy media" should be held to a higher standard. Today they are semi fascist. Totally agree..
But right wing media lies far more than 'legacy media" and they have captured the minds of close to 40% of voters. it was right wing media not legacy media that convinced 80% of Republican voters that Trump won the election and that The Mueller report exhonerated Trump. Both are flat out lies and they are as destructive of our democracy as "legacy" media not reporting honestly on the fact that Twitter was taking marching orders from the NSA during the build up to Ukraine.
Matt can't come down on both sides because he will lose his paid subscribers. One need not spend much time on this board to see where his paid subscribers come from and they are right wingers who regurgitate right wing media propaganda in almost every post.
I love Matt... I can't say i would do any different if i was him. But i am not going to fool myself. Hassan was doing exactly what Matt and Fox news do. Reporting in a manner that gives their audience what they want even if it not the FULL TRUTH..
The FULL TRUTH is that right wing media is destroying democracy every bit as much as the NYT and CNN... I can say that because it is true. Matt can't
"Right wing media lies far more than legacy media."
This is complete nonsense. Legacy media has been influenced by postmodernism and critical theory, which basically invents conclusions (race/gender, climate, Covid-19). How can you not see this? We are dealing with a top-down tyranny.
WT
How can it be a "top down tyranny" when the FOX supported GOP controlled the House, Senate and Presidency for two full years? FOX is the #1 rated cable new channel and the love to brag about it.
Let me quote Matt's Wikipedia page on this:
<<Taibbi argues that BOTH sides of the political media spectrum are complicit in dividing the country and fueling hate.[14] In 2019, Taibbi self-published the book Hate Inc., a critique of the mainstream media landscape.[101] Reviewing the book for Paste, Jason Rhode called it a "brilliant indictment of American media", praising the majority of the book but criticized Taibbi for "[spending] a section of his book both-sidesing both MSNBC and FOX".>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Taibbi
The top-down tyranny has more to do with the WEF (the Dems are 100% on board with it). I'm also referring to the progressive movement that has captured most of our institutions (science, medicine, the military, professional sports, Hollywood, most of corporate America, Silicon Valley, etc.) and the Dems, with almost no exceptions I can think of, are on board with this movement, including their allies in the media. Pointing to the reactionary lone wolf that is FOX as you so often do is a glaring false equivalent.
WT - The World Economic Forum has no leverage what so ever over American politics. So your premise is flawed from the start. The TOP when it comes to US policy is the Presidency, the House and the Senate along with the courts. All of which the GOP has controlled or controls.
Who is this "progressive movement" you are referring to? Is it Bernie Sanders and AOC who oppose corporate control of campaign financing and who are fighting to tax the rich and provide Medicare for All or are they Nancy Pelosi who is the leader at of the Democratic party and the leader extracting money from the corporations to fund Dem Campaigns. Because leaders like AOC and Sanders oppose that. and she would not even have a vote on Medicare for All when the Dems had the Sentate house and presidency? Is she the leader of this progressive movment? If so i too oppose her.
Or is the "progressive movement" Obama who's economic team decided to bail out bank share holders and protect bank executive bonuses while leaving home owners to twist in the wing during the Financial crises. Does Obama control them or do they control Obama? You can't answer that because your narrative makes no sense what so ever.
Exactly what is this "progressive" movement you refer to that controls what Hollywood, Corporate American and Silicon Valley do? It sound like you are regurgitating Rush Llimbaugh dialogue which we now know even he did not even believe because it is so fantastic.
The GOP do exactly what Corporate America tells them to do on Tax Cuts to the rich, bailing out banks, funding big oil, funding wars for big oil, denying climate change, de regulating monoplies and on and on.
What the heck are you even talking about?
Rush Limbaugh--GFY. You don't know what I'm talking about because most of your reading comes from people who have a boss. It's a mind virus.
Hang in there Matt, we are with you. History will prove you right.
History is already proving him right!
Matt was able to expose the Democrats in Congress as attackers of the First Amendment.
Matt was then able to expose MSNBC, a lamestream "news" show, as being lapdog for that Democrat-led destruction of the First Amendment.
These two highly important exposés happened within a matter of weeks, which is hilarious, I might add.
After I read Matt's take-down of MSNBC, I spent awhile contemplating how to take down my Democrat Legislative Members of the WA State House. They voted last week to approve the draconian UCC Amendments. Here's my best take-down yet: https://open.substack.com/pub/wahomeowners/p/my-best-take-down-yet?r=tbmjj&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Thanks for the encouragement, Matt, you're one of the BEST!
Democrats gonna hire someone for the "Democrat-led destruction of the First Amendment?" Or are they gonna save money and do it themselves (democrats are notoriously cheap bastards).
I hope they know that a B&E, especially at the Library of Congress, carries stiff penalties. And you know the democrats! Once they pull out the exacto knife for the swift but brutal excision of the 1st amendment from that piece of hallowed 18th-century parchment you can kiss goodbye to the 2nd amendment as well!
history will prove him right if justice wins out. history is told by the victors, so chances are the truth will be buried and people like matt will be held up as the liars attempting to prevent progress.
Reading Substack articles is great but I also enjoy the thoughtful comments section. Twitter’s format is a dumpster fire. The comments are often hyperbolic childish drivel.
...and hateful (Twitter). I love the comments communities on Substack. People disagree with intelligence and mostly good manners. I learn a lot as well.
The challenge will be to keep it that way. Reddit was decent for awhile (about 2 minutes), then shat the bed. Even the old (!) online Bulletin Boards showed some promise until they devolved into the inevitable shitshow. It seems an inherent aspect of the internet, writ large: the digital 'public square' becomes a cacophony of every voice, shouting, all at the same time. Worrisome.
If someone calls another a s******d (or worse, say F you) I respectfully admonish them w ‘hey, this isn’t Twitter’ or ‘we don’t talk like that on Substack’. I’ve never gotten a negative reply (and I’ve rarely experienced meanness, etc on SS either). I think we should all stick together and call it out. WE are the comment’s community.
I mean, it’s worth a try.
Agreed
Paid sub helps limit that a little bit. Maybe the price needs to go up at some point just to keep it that way.
Pretty good, but not worth much if it devolves to everyone agreeing with each other. Thankfully in this Stack there are feldspar and a few others that throw some sand in the wheels to keep it from getting too harmonious.
An example is people here stating the mainstream media is cracking up or destroying itself. That usually gets a few likes. But is it true? or does it just feel good to say it?
That’s why I learn a lot. I think the mix of opinions is great. The pushback is what most of us enjoy. Repartee. It never HAS to devolve into Twitter-esque name-calling. Why should it?
There are certain beliefs and rituals that any good tribe member MUST ascribe too. Otherwise. . .
Someone will accuse them of the being an AI. Because, "what other possible explanation could there be for dissenting?"
Or spam... Or increasingly, advertisements. The Twitter comments section is garbage compared to Substack. In fact, I would go out on a limb and say that Substack has the best comments section of any website I've ever been on.
The old The Straight Dope was pretty good as well, but it was policed by volunteer moderators who could suspend abusive users, delete off-topic threads, or move them to a discussion thread designated for ranting and raving.
I think on most platforms, the early adopters are serious users. Once it gains a certain level of popularity, it attracts the lower common denominators: narcissists seeking attention, immature types who enjoy annoying others, one-topic ranters and ravers, etc. People who come for genuine discourse tire of the noise and leave, lowering the signal-to-noise ratio in a downward spiral.
Community policing, via shaming or ignoring, is minimally effective. Moderation works better, but is time-consuming and subject to bias. Substack, Ricochet and others have hit on a good solution: comments are only available to paying subscribers. Few trolls are willing to put their money where their mouths are.
Moderation?
Another word for censorship.
It can be, certainly. And if you define any limitation on speech as "censorship," then absolutely, it is.
But, as discussed earlier, any unfettered forum quickly devolves into a morass of all-caps invective and hyperbole, interspersed with Lonely Singles In Your Area. Which tends to defeat the purpose of having a forum in the first place. There need to be some limitations, and some way of enforcing them.
The eternal problem, of course, is who defines those limits, and how are they enforced. For no matter where you draw the line, someone will consider it too restrictive.
FWIW, I found the Straight Dope moderators to be reasonable and to take a light touch, though I'm certain they had their biases. They are only human, after all.
The Substack / Ricochet model of opening comments only to paid subscribers seems to do a decent job of keeping the trolls at bay, without placing any limits on anyone. (Though page owners do have the power to ban people.)
Yeah, Straight Dope was my online "community" then I drifted to reddit. Now only use that for headline scanning and specific things like college football. Now it's more substack. But really I jump around more these days multiple platforms.
I agree with you about the quality of the comments on Substack.
However, if you haven't looked at Naked Capitalism (nakedcapitalism.com), I highly recommend that you do so. IMHO, it has the best commentariat with Substack a very close second. I frequently learn as much from the comments at NC as I do from the original post.
I agree with that. That fact is one of the things that genuinely surprised me perusing here.
I agree with you and Lucy. Already made the same comparison in another comments section. Substack is where we come to learn!
at least here, things generally stay closer the topic or something related. commenters also are more likely to take a calmer tone with each other. Twitter and Facebook just seem to have become a means for the companies to generate clicks rather than serving up interesting or useful topics/discussion. In a way, Substack is kinda like a throwback to reading a newspaper, but with an instant Letter to the Editor add on. Perfect for a slowpoke like me.
And badly veiled threats!
Unlike here.
They are coming at you with the same playbook described in the excellent Sharyl Attkisson books. It's familiar and utterly predictable to see the Media Establishment go into complete attack mode against someone or something they can't control. Sucks for you of course but they don't give any real journalist much of a choice.
You've proven more than worthy of my $5/month, stay the course brother! Wishing you a Happy Easter with the family!
don't worry about us out here in substack reader land. Enjoy your vacation. Get back with us afterwards. Thanks for everything, Matt.
Yojimbo, baby.
Also why people need to learn the difference between cultural appropriation and influence.
Without Italian directors stealing from japanese directors stealing from American directors, we wouldn't have Seven Samurai or the Magnificent Seven, or Fist Full Of Dollars.
And that would suck.
Lol. When I lived in Russia, I tried to co-write a screenplay with one of the editors from “Don’t Sleep,” the Russian partner publication to my paper, the eXile. We were going to steal from the American directors stealing from the Italian directors stealing from the Japanese directors, and make a version of “Magnificent Seven” based on post-communist Russia, when a ton of Russian military badasses were being hired as mercenaries by gangsters. I had done a story about a former collective farm hamlet in Siberia being robbed every night by bandits…. We never quite finished it, but that “ Великолепная семерка” screenplay still exists somewhere.
You have lived such an interesting life with experiences most of have never even thought of. Thanks for sharing it with us.
OK, love U lots Matt but really SVP *** disconnect for a while *** & spend some quality time with those kids! 💓💓💓💓💓💓💓💥👍🔥
We will all the more appreciate your return (rested & ready for much more action) to the battlefield !!!
SVP?
“Pretty please” en Francois
Thanks. These TLA's are killing me! LOL
Holy fuck. That sounds amazing.
I would have traveled to Russia to see that one even if wasn't subtitled in English.
Kurosawa sued Leone.
And won.
As was fair.
I’m sure you’ve seen it, but I just watched the Ostern ‘White Sun of Desert’ and loved every second. Enjoy your well deserved vacation sir!
Actually you should have pitched it to Putin. He would have loved it.
*Also we love hearing about your vacation - cathartic for you & for us
Awesome! And btw thanks to your wife & kids who carried the load while you researched the Twitter Files.
There are some really enjoyable Russian Westerns AKA Osterns, Red Westerns, or best of all Borscht Westerns! out there for the viewing fellow Substackers!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostern
I barely touched surface and now looking very much forward to going down rabbit hole😉
https://klassiki.online/favourite-5-red-westerns-and-osterns/
Edit:
I just watched ‘White Sun of Desert’ on YouTube and it’s a new favorite!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auj_u7wEyw8
Or Star Wars…although I appreciate George Lucas isn’t an Italian director.
Calling you an employee of Substack was irresponsible.
Musk is only responsible to the deep state and money.
He's never going to Mars either.
I wish he would.
who called him an employee - Mehi? I thought I heard him say that but cant recall...
Elon
We stand proudly behind you and your work, Matt.
Your work will stand on its own for the record of these times.
Together we are legion.
Matt is the best!
You're making history, and doing it with integrity. Thank you. Thank you. Love and best wishes to you and your family.
Hey Matt, if one-hundredth of journalists had your work ethic, conscience, humility, and intelligence, damn, we might stand a chance. May your example inspire more of the good ones to make some noise.
And yes, Kurosawa: one of the greatest filmmakers of all time.
Your work on Twitter files gives me hope that this ship can be righted. Thank you
Thanks for sharing a positive view, it is in short supply
You can be Steve McQueen in the US tribute version.
Thank you for your tenacity and moral courage. Quite refreshing. Happy Easter and enjoy those kiddos.
Take a break!! Enjoy your kids...they grow up fast!
Appears Elon has blinked. Direct links to substacks are working on Twitter
Yes, I tested an old one and it worked.
I’ll give Elon the benefit of the doubt and assume he considered his actions and chose a course correction. He’s always been a bit impulsive. The heterodox community needs to stick together to gain traction over the cultural insanity of our times. Hopefully Matt, Bari, and Elon will sit down over a beer and work things out.
But not a Bud Light lol.
Elon is not who I thought he was. He’s weak. He has principles and the power to live by them, but he loses his nerve. He seems to do better when politics and public opinion are not involved, like when he’s making and spending piles of his own money. Let’s hope he’s learning something in between the waffling.
I must respectfully disagree with you about Elon Musk. I think Musk, like every billionaire, is morally bankrupt. The only things they care about are money and power. If he is such a free speech warrior why does he submit to India’s and China’s censorship demands? Because he will lose huge amounts of money if he does not. I agree that he does well making and spending money, exerting his power. The same applies to all oligarchs.
Thank you for that opinion. You have a point. I was predisposed to be happy when Elon took over Twitter, but maybe I gave him too much credit for being a principled person and not enough blame for being a venal capitalist.
Until the next whim.