Matt, I’ve been an on and off reader of yours since the Bush years and Rolling Stone. In the past few weeks, I’ve read Hate Inc (via audiobook) and was stunned to find another liberal whose take on the modern political conversation is so close to the things I’ve been screaming at MSNBC and the New York Times that somehow make all my liberal friends think I’m a Trump supporter. Except all organized and stuff! Now I’m going back and bingeing Useful Idiots. Your work is incredibly necessary. Keep writing and podcasting. I’m listening.
Why would you apologize for offering the book through an independent book company - at any price - rather than having to order through Amazon who - in addition to all of their other sordid activities - was just fined 68 million dollars (pocket change to them ) for essentially screwing their delivery drivers out of their tips?
Thinking over the premise of Hate Inc has got me thinking about what a truly neutral fact-based news source would look like. Matt, what are your thoughts on Wikipedia? They’re certainly an example of a “tech giant” that has gone out of its way not to monetize, and they’re probably used and trusted equally by the left and right. They don’t market themselves as “news”, but any major news story will have a page up in minutes. There is vigorous debate over content in plain sight, and I have no idea how many people are involved in the writing, but it’s voice is the closest thing to the vox populi I can think of.
Even Wikipedia has its problems. I learned awhile back that Wikipedia censored reference to an article published by The Nation magazine because Aaron Mate wrote it and that he’s banned as a source of information there. That’s a big deal to me. I also was taken aback when I saw a subtle but startling change to its entry on Operation Mockingbird, shifting to calling it an “alleged” CIA operation. I’ve seen other questionable editing decisions.
Matt - curious about one aspect of the election. During the primaries you and Ms. Halper were really skeptical of Biden's chances against Trump, and pretty bullish about Sanders. Some of that was pre-pandemic, of course, but was there anything that happened during the election that made you question your initial views on Biden's chances? I don't mean this as a gotcha question, or anything else. Really appreciate your work.
I think it was the pandemic, but more importantly the way that Obama, in a historic manner, pulled all of the mainstream democrats together to defeat Bernie before Super Tuesday. It was a worst case scenario for Bernie. Pete and Amy both drop out and back Biden. Warren stays in the race. Following Super Tuesday, the narrative that Biden was the chosen one and you're a trump supporter if you don't immediately support him to fight trump was pushed hard by MSNBC and mainstream media.
I don't think any of us could have predicted how Warren would go so hard against Bernie as well (at least I didn't). Unsurprisingly, she has nothing to show for it.
Warren, who was once touted as Sanders soul mate in the Sen, pointedly refused to endorse either him or Clinton in the '16 Pres primary, saying she would "just let the process play out" - rather clear to me that the "bosses" in the party told her that if she ever had any ambitions in the party, she better not buck Clinton ....
Perhaps thinking "finally, my turn" in '20, not gaining any traction at the polls, she figured backing Biden might get her a place in his admin - but oops, she was the wrong color ...
The pandemic was likely the factor that cost Trump just that many votes to lose PA, WI, AZ and Georgia, and possibly MI. People forget too easily that if just 100k voters in those first four states switched from Biden to Trump, Trump would be in the WH today.
Having said that, the who knows how much the pandemic was also a factor behind the the riots and protests of 2020 and that was also a major factor in how many people voted in November, both for Biden and Trump. If we'd had no pandemic, and that in turn meant no pent up anger/frustration from being unemployed and cooped up at home during the first wave of shutdowns, would have we seen the George Floyd riots and the subsequent BLM protests (and how much were the BLM protests really a protest against Trump rather than police brutality)? I don't know, but I also don't think they're unrelated.
«was there anything that happened during the election that made you question your initial views on Biden's chances?»
None of those predictions mattered because the actual vote counts are nothing like they were predictable, being unprecedented: D Trump's votes went up by 18% and J Biden's votes were 22% higher than for H Clinton. Looking at some more local data there were some even yuuuger jump, e.g. the Democratic vote for the House in Georgia jumped by 59% betwen 2016 and 2020. I guess many trumpian and democrat activist involved in the election process thought that they would feel very guilty if they did not help their side win by any means necessary, to protect "democracy itself".
Still in the crucial states the Biden margin of victory was often around 1%, just like it was often 1% in 2016 for Trump.
I can't find an email address so I will state my question here: what do you think of the investment by a figure like Craig Newmark, billionaire philanthropist and founder of Craig's List, in projects for "bettering journalism" by "fighting the information war"? I was at first considering sending an application to the Eyebeam Foundation, which announces a grant for artists who dabble in investigative journalism and who want to work on a topic related to the abuse of technology. However, upon reading on the recipients, I noticed they seem to favour artists applying for a grant to make 3d models and maps of Chinese concentration camps or other Cold War type activities, which I guess should be paid directly in large sums by the CIA without forcing agitprop artists to first apply for a meagre grant. I hope to have your thoughts and information on Craig Newmark's investment in "resistance journalism" and Cold war.
kind regards,
Arturo Desimone (substack subscriber putting subscription on temp hiatus later this month)
Part of that is not just media excess, but also their victims, and I just noticed a truly amazing example of extreme TDS from an otherwise reasonable and mild NYC law professor:
“Trump is one of two people - Bin Laden is the other - to have orchestrated a violent attack on the US Capitol Building in the last twenty years. (The Capitol Building is believed to have been Flight 93's target.) Both were acts of war against the United States, although Bin Laden's was a foreign attack and Trump's a domestic one. Trump's attack not only came closer to success - they actually breached the building - but aimed to do far more to destroy our institutions and way of life. Bin Laden's was a raid, meant to terrorize and provoke a response that would feed further escalation of ongoing global conflicts. Trump's was meant to decapitate the legislative branch, with accompanying mass murder and hostage-taking, and to put a permanent end to democratic (small-d) governance in the United States.
After 9/11, there was (to say the least) no U.S. domestic support for Bin Laden. Given that what Trump attempted was just as bad, and indeed in some ways worse, it is remarkable that he should retain any domestic support or even tolerance, outside of the most extreme terrorist elements in our country.”
That “acts of war against the United States [...] Trump's was meant to decapitate the legislative branch, with accompanying mass murder and hostage-taking” is fantastic (in the literal sense). But I have found other TDS victims claiming that a massacre of members of Congress was only narrowly avoided.
Hate Inc. subsidiaries have worked hard to bring TDS to such extreme levels, and their success is remarkable indeed.
I am listening to the Jordan Peterson Sunday Times interview full audio right now. The gap between this long audio and what is reported on the interview and the Twitter takeaways is massive of course. It spurred a thought: are we basically entering a situation where part of the cultural gap is the dichotomy between those who practice soundbyte and headline reactivity (Twittersphere and its trending towards the Borg) and those who entertain deep thought and long form discussion (a la Joe Rogan and Matt's book)?
Congrats on the success of the book, Matt. It's well-earned and it's rewarding to see that this will get the message out there a bit more.
Our culture has devolved into two separate monologues driven by the combined forces of social media pushing triggering, scary news (a la the Social Dilemma) and the media business model changing to favor pushing triggering, scary news (even more than it used to). So now we have triggered, scared people on both sides and a bunch of us sitting here in the middle that have been wondering for a while what the heck has been going on. Thanks for helping us figure it out.
"The new edition delves into these issues, asking how the Trump era accelerated the divisiveness industry, and what some of the consequences of this might have been".
And the level of maturity, professionalism, compassion and openness by the Democrats, the MSM, and the Biden administration is truly inspiring. The words and actions of kindness, calm, and rationality has been a lesson for the entire world. It's such a huge difference. /s.
Can you seriously look at the idiots in this Admin, the MSM, and the Left and think for one second that it's better? Wake up, this is war and all they're doing is making it worse. This is 1858 and Fort Sumter is not that far away.
Did you read “Hate Inc?” Do you follow Taibbi? It is laughable to say he thinks there is “maturity, professionalism, compassion and openness by the Democrats, the MSM” or that he believes the “Biden administration is truly awesome.” Matt makes a living ripping apart the Dems and the MSM, along with the GOP and Trump. He rags on Biden continually. I just listened to a podcast interview with him in which he said he didn’t vote for Biden or Trump, and that he’s “terrified” by the Biden admin (and the MSM stroking Biden and his crew). In other words, I think you are barking up the wrong tree.
Be sure to distinguish between "the Trump era" and "Trump." I completely agree with your sentiments (well, not the Fort Sumter part), but I don't think he's singling out Trump sans the media. To me, "the Trump era" is defined more by the entrenched DC bureaucrats and lost-their-minds media than by Trump.
Trump was abrasive, obviously, but that was hardly the complete story. The media was heartbroken they didn't get their glass-ceiling-busting, first-woman, tough-woman, model-for-little-girls, we-already-bought-the-fireworks administration.
I ended up with a hardback copy and a paperback copy of the original. Can't keep track of what I order. Anyway, looks like I'll be getting a third copy...direct from OR Books.
Cool to see the JR Plug. I actually ordered the book before Christmas and my local book store told me to wait until February with the new edition. Looking forward to it!
Matt, I’ve been an on and off reader of yours since the Bush years and Rolling Stone. In the past few weeks, I’ve read Hate Inc (via audiobook) and was stunned to find another liberal whose take on the modern political conversation is so close to the things I’ve been screaming at MSNBC and the New York Times that somehow make all my liberal friends think I’m a Trump supporter. Except all organized and stuff! Now I’m going back and bingeing Useful Idiots. Your work is incredibly necessary. Keep writing and podcasting. I’m listening.
Why would you apologize for offering the book through an independent book company - at any price - rather than having to order through Amazon who - in addition to all of their other sordid activities - was just fined 68 million dollars (pocket change to them ) for essentially screwing their delivery drivers out of their tips?
Amen! anyplace but Amazon!
Any chance of getting an audiobook edition read by either Christopher Walken or Ice-T?
I suggested Gilbert Gottfried, but love the idea of Walken.
Oh god, I fully approve!
"...for THE CHANCE!"
Will the kindle version be updated?
That's my question too.
Glad it's selling well. Congrats!
You should do an article that allows us to discuss the book.
Thinking over the premise of Hate Inc has got me thinking about what a truly neutral fact-based news source would look like. Matt, what are your thoughts on Wikipedia? They’re certainly an example of a “tech giant” that has gone out of its way not to monetize, and they’re probably used and trusted equally by the left and right. They don’t market themselves as “news”, but any major news story will have a page up in minutes. There is vigorous debate over content in plain sight, and I have no idea how many people are involved in the writing, but it’s voice is the closest thing to the vox populi I can think of.
Even Wikipedia has its problems. I learned awhile back that Wikipedia censored reference to an article published by The Nation magazine because Aaron Mate wrote it and that he’s banned as a source of information there. That’s a big deal to me. I also was taken aback when I saw a subtle but startling change to its entry on Operation Mockingbird, shifting to calling it an “alleged” CIA operation. I’ve seen other questionable editing decisions.
I have making a small monthly donation to Wikipedia for several years for the very reasons you list.
Ah just bad timing from Rogan’s plug. Good problem to have.
Ordered.
Matt - curious about one aspect of the election. During the primaries you and Ms. Halper were really skeptical of Biden's chances against Trump, and pretty bullish about Sanders. Some of that was pre-pandemic, of course, but was there anything that happened during the election that made you question your initial views on Biden's chances? I don't mean this as a gotcha question, or anything else. Really appreciate your work.
I think it was the pandemic, but more importantly the way that Obama, in a historic manner, pulled all of the mainstream democrats together to defeat Bernie before Super Tuesday. It was a worst case scenario for Bernie. Pete and Amy both drop out and back Biden. Warren stays in the race. Following Super Tuesday, the narrative that Biden was the chosen one and you're a trump supporter if you don't immediately support him to fight trump was pushed hard by MSNBC and mainstream media.
I don't think any of us could have predicted how Warren would go so hard against Bernie as well (at least I didn't). Unsurprisingly, she has nothing to show for it.
Warren, who was once touted as Sanders soul mate in the Sen, pointedly refused to endorse either him or Clinton in the '16 Pres primary, saying she would "just let the process play out" - rather clear to me that the "bosses" in the party told her that if she ever had any ambitions in the party, she better not buck Clinton ....
Perhaps thinking "finally, my turn" in '20, not gaining any traction at the polls, she figured backing Biden might get her a place in his admin - but oops, she was the wrong color ...
Calum, I think you answered your own question...the pandemic.
The pandemic was likely the factor that cost Trump just that many votes to lose PA, WI, AZ and Georgia, and possibly MI. People forget too easily that if just 100k voters in those first four states switched from Biden to Trump, Trump would be in the WH today.
Having said that, the who knows how much the pandemic was also a factor behind the the riots and protests of 2020 and that was also a major factor in how many people voted in November, both for Biden and Trump. If we'd had no pandemic, and that in turn meant no pent up anger/frustration from being unemployed and cooped up at home during the first wave of shutdowns, would have we seen the George Floyd riots and the subsequent BLM protests (and how much were the BLM protests really a protest against Trump rather than police brutality)? I don't know, but I also don't think they're unrelated.
Sorry, not a Trump fan but those votes that won it for Biden were fraudulent.
What, local D machines in Ohilly and Detroit aren’t to be trusted!?! Say it ain’t so.
«was there anything that happened during the election that made you question your initial views on Biden's chances?»
None of those predictions mattered because the actual vote counts are nothing like they were predictable, being unprecedented: D Trump's votes went up by 18% and J Biden's votes were 22% higher than for H Clinton. Looking at some more local data there were some even yuuuger jump, e.g. the Democratic vote for the House in Georgia jumped by 59% betwen 2016 and 2020. I guess many trumpian and democrat activist involved in the election process thought that they would feel very guilty if they did not help their side win by any means necessary, to protect "democracy itself".
Still in the crucial states the Biden margin of victory was often around 1%, just like it was often 1% in 2016 for Trump.
Dear Matt Taibbi,
I can't find an email address so I will state my question here: what do you think of the investment by a figure like Craig Newmark, billionaire philanthropist and founder of Craig's List, in projects for "bettering journalism" by "fighting the information war"? I was at first considering sending an application to the Eyebeam Foundation, which announces a grant for artists who dabble in investigative journalism and who want to work on a topic related to the abuse of technology. However, upon reading on the recipients, I noticed they seem to favour artists applying for a grant to make 3d models and maps of Chinese concentration camps or other Cold War type activities, which I guess should be paid directly in large sums by the CIA without forcing agitprop artists to first apply for a meagre grant. I hope to have your thoughts and information on Craig Newmark's investment in "resistance journalism" and Cold war.
kind regards,
Arturo Desimone (substack subscriber putting subscription on temp hiatus later this month)
Is there an e-mail address?
«looking back at the Trump years»
Part of that is not just media excess, but also their victims, and I just noticed a truly amazing example of extreme TDS from an otherwise reasonable and mild NYC law professor:
http://danshaviro.blogspot.com/2021/01/trump-and-bin-laden.html
“Trump is one of two people - Bin Laden is the other - to have orchestrated a violent attack on the US Capitol Building in the last twenty years. (The Capitol Building is believed to have been Flight 93's target.) Both were acts of war against the United States, although Bin Laden's was a foreign attack and Trump's a domestic one. Trump's attack not only came closer to success - they actually breached the building - but aimed to do far more to destroy our institutions and way of life. Bin Laden's was a raid, meant to terrorize and provoke a response that would feed further escalation of ongoing global conflicts. Trump's was meant to decapitate the legislative branch, with accompanying mass murder and hostage-taking, and to put a permanent end to democratic (small-d) governance in the United States.
After 9/11, there was (to say the least) no U.S. domestic support for Bin Laden. Given that what Trump attempted was just as bad, and indeed in some ways worse, it is remarkable that he should retain any domestic support or even tolerance, outside of the most extreme terrorist elements in our country.”
That “acts of war against the United States [...] Trump's was meant to decapitate the legislative branch, with accompanying mass murder and hostage-taking” is fantastic (in the literal sense). But I have found other TDS victims claiming that a massacre of members of Congress was only narrowly avoided.
Hate Inc. subsidiaries have worked hard to bring TDS to such extreme levels, and their success is remarkable indeed.
I am listening to the Jordan Peterson Sunday Times interview full audio right now. The gap between this long audio and what is reported on the interview and the Twitter takeaways is massive of course. It spurred a thought: are we basically entering a situation where part of the cultural gap is the dichotomy between those who practice soundbyte and headline reactivity (Twittersphere and its trending towards the Borg) and those who entertain deep thought and long form discussion (a la Joe Rogan and Matt's book)?
Anyway this part of the interview is tremendously affecting: https://youtu.be/Fd2wKn6-X_A?t=467
Congrats on the success of the book, Matt. It's well-earned and it's rewarding to see that this will get the message out there a bit more.
Our culture has devolved into two separate monologues driven by the combined forces of social media pushing triggering, scary news (a la the Social Dilemma) and the media business model changing to favor pushing triggering, scary news (even more than it used to). So now we have triggered, scared people on both sides and a bunch of us sitting here in the middle that have been wondering for a while what the heck has been going on. Thanks for helping us figure it out.
"The new edition delves into these issues, asking how the Trump era accelerated the divisiveness industry, and what some of the consequences of this might have been".
And the level of maturity, professionalism, compassion and openness by the Democrats, the MSM, and the Biden administration is truly inspiring. The words and actions of kindness, calm, and rationality has been a lesson for the entire world. It's such a huge difference. /s.
Can you seriously look at the idiots in this Admin, the MSM, and the Left and think for one second that it's better? Wake up, this is war and all they're doing is making it worse. This is 1858 and Fort Sumter is not that far away.
Did you read “Hate Inc?” Do you follow Taibbi? It is laughable to say he thinks there is “maturity, professionalism, compassion and openness by the Democrats, the MSM” or that he believes the “Biden administration is truly awesome.” Matt makes a living ripping apart the Dems and the MSM, along with the GOP and Trump. He rags on Biden continually. I just listened to a podcast interview with him in which he said he didn’t vote for Biden or Trump, and that he’s “terrified” by the Biden admin (and the MSM stroking Biden and his crew). In other words, I think you are barking up the wrong tree.
I think you may have missed the /s at the end, which, If I am not mistaken, means "snark"
Be sure to distinguish between "the Trump era" and "Trump." I completely agree with your sentiments (well, not the Fort Sumter part), but I don't think he's singling out Trump sans the media. To me, "the Trump era" is defined more by the entrenched DC bureaucrats and lost-their-minds media than by Trump.
Trump was abrasive, obviously, but that was hardly the complete story. The media was heartbroken they didn't get their glass-ceiling-busting, first-woman, tough-woman, model-for-little-girls, we-already-bought-the-fireworks administration.
I ended up with a hardback copy and a paperback copy of the original. Can't keep track of what I order. Anyway, looks like I'll be getting a third copy...direct from OR Books.
I do wonder how long it will be before Facebook bans any advertising of Hate Inc. due to, you know, being filled with hate ;)
Cool to see the JR Plug. I actually ordered the book before Christmas and my local book store told me to wait until February with the new edition. Looking forward to it!