About how much they adore Trump and any criticism is either hypocritical, sour grapes or both? They have earned the contempt they are showered with. It’s pathetic.
We know what one half will do, which is justify and rationalize literally everything the Trump admin does (while seeking a life time appointment from Trump as Librarian of Congress by the way, tiny conflict of interest that Matt seems to happily ignore) and Matt will basically nod along and sometimes say he “doesn’t love” what Trump is doing but that the media is worse.
It’s literally the same formula every week. You can predict with 100% certainty that Walter Kirn will support whatever the current admin is doing. Even when he criticized the previous admin for doing the exact same things, he defends Trump when he does it.
Why would we need to wait to hear which version of idiotic conspiracy thinking Walter will use to apologize for the Trump admin this week before assuming that’s what he will do, since he does it every week?
Last week he was justifying the targeted killing of unarmed civilians by our military not as a one-off mistake but as the proper and just policy going forward - kill civilians. He also justified a war on Venezuela by making up a crack headed theory that fentanyl (which has nothing to do with Venezuela in reality, reality being a place Kirn rarely visits) is the new chemical weapon and weapon of mass destruction. Therefor, any and all acts against both the government and civilian population - up to and including targeting and killing unarmed civilians en mass - are justified.
So again, why wait for the pablum before commenting? You think he’s going to surprise us this week?
The problem is, Andrew, that certain topics which should be discussed are instead silenced or mocked under the regular article forums.
Even Substack (and sometimes especially Substack) uses the Mob Attack against any commenter who dares question the Substack host or the inner working of the Substack System. There are many groupies on each popular Substack site....and they put up formidable hurdles to any comments not showing their particular rock stars in a worshipful celebrity light.
In other words, they drum you off if your comments do not suit their Substack-host fantasies.
So the off-topic issues or awkward questions sometimes find a home here.
In the name of free speech and truthful writing...of course!
Thanks, RAO. This comment forum right now is being used for the nebulous issues which are always criticized as being off-topic, or completely silenced under the regular articles.
I used it today as a sort of liminal space, where the supposed unspeakable is spoken.
You take your opportunities where you can find them.
I am surprised that for a journalist of some stature, Matt T. never investigates or even mentions the Substack System. But then Substack has been exceedingly good to Matt, in every way. Ahem. Therefore I may need to do a Bob Woodward/Carl Bernstein move.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the Substack phenomenon. I enjoy the content and the outlet it gives to independent voices (and even though I’ve been labeled a troll by the true believers for my dissent, I enjoy some of Matt’s content , especially when it come to literature).
But Matt has told us ad nauseam that Substack and people like himself and Joe Rogan are the New Media that will blow a fresh wind through journalism while the MSM withers on the vine because of its irrelevance. Matt, whose own numbers seem to be plummeting now, has equated ratings with credibility, and he has celebrated cutbacks and firings by MSM, which he doesn’t bother to define, but almost invariably refers only to media he considers antagonistic to him. Rogan is a professional bloviator and Matt now has retreated from doing any original reporting (ironically he has been reduced to sifting through revelations he finds out about in the NYT and the WaPo).
I find his posture reductive and hypocritical, and I would like to see a healthy ecosystem that encompasses a wide spectrum of voices.
The problem with a world of Joe Rogans and Matt Taibbi’s is the same thing they advertise as being their advantage— they have no oversight. They have no editors. They have no one to call their BS other than a few voices like mine. And yet they can be as wrongheaded and fallible and stupid as MSM. They exist in a bubble. Making matters worse, they revive the worst abuses of yellow journalism, by feeding their most radicalized bases with sensationalist stories, culture wars and false polemics.
Lastly. I disagree with you wholeheartedly that these two are centrists. Matt professes to be a populist, but his enthusiastically throwing his lot in with the polices of a faux populist billionaire like Trump makes him a reactionary in my book. Kirn is straight up MAGA, he doesn’t hide it.
Not only is Kirn maga, he aspires to be appointed by the administration to the library of congress director.
Matt in print is a super snarky witty fellow. In live debates he is a bashful puppy. He either rolls over for a belly rub from the likes of Kirn, or he pisses all over the floor like he did with mehdi hassan. For those that don’t understand why we hate watch, I personally don’t have the crayons or the inclination to enlighten them
"The problem with a world of Joe Rogans and Matt Taibbi’s is the same thing they advertise as being their advantage— they have no oversight. They have no editors."
I think I have made that same statement about a thousand times on various Substack sites.
It is the Wild West, for good or for bad. Some writers will use it wisely, while others will take full advantage of every loophole and self-serving possibility. I could name a few Substack hosts such as that right now, yet their fans/groupies still worship at their feet. For the same reasons that one-third of Canadians voted for the odious Troodos.
There is no one to reign-in the baddie-ism or those who twist opinion. The Rasputins of the world do exist. And they LOVE Substack. It is a vehicle after their own hearts. Such opportunity!
And let's face it, most people do not realize they are being controlled in the opinion ring, until it all falls apart. Like the Pied Piper mesmerizing the children. They just don't get it. They follow a Pied Piper right over the cliff. Even otherwise intelligent adults.
And have you noted the kind of revenue numbers attached to the most popular Substack sites? Eye-watering. For the kind of writing that about 20% of the literate population can produce. So why don't they? Because you need the connections to start with. Or great PR. Or talent in con-artistry. Take your pick. Simply being a good writer does not do it. In fact, a few of the most popular Substack hosts are not good writers at all. They use gimmicks. They are more like talented scammers.
And some really excellent writers on Substack have so few subscribers that they eventually close shop. It is certainly not all about talent and integrity and worthiness. Contrary to what the average person thinks about Substack.
I have already seen egregious Substack sins that are as bad as those of MSM.
What is this silly idea that human foibles can be bypassed by virtue of using the Substack model?
Indeed. He professes love for the economic populism of the ‘old Bernie’ before he ‘sold out.’ But I can see you mistaking him a member of the Eastern establishment, because ultimately that is where he came from and it is what he is reverting to.
Hey Matt, looking forward to your take on two Trump initiatives that you’ve staked your credibility as a reporter on— DOGE and the Comey, James & Weissman prosecutions. You’ve been very enthusiastic about these actions by Trump. I believe there have been several developments. As much as we’d like your take on influencer Jennifer Welch, this seems a little more worth your time (and ours —assuming Kirn lets you get a word in edgewise).
Mr. Wright, I know you often post here as the antagonist.
I am a centrist myself. I find that Matt and Walter are fairly centrist. Not particularly leftwing or rightwing.
However, like all revenue-generating Substack hosts, they shy very heavily away from discussing the oddities and eyebrow-raising controversies of Substack itself. As in, "Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg". But where does that leave us? And their credibility?
The unspoken house rules are that no one is allowed to ask about Substack itself, or criticize it, or tell their own account of what hypocritical things have happened to them on Substack "freedom-fighter" sites (which turn out to be more totalitarian than freedom-fighting if a person dares to disagree with the "godly" host).
Where do such Substack hosts think they acquire this degree of authority? Yesterday they were simple freelance writers, if even that. Some of them came from nowhere, with no particular credentials or proven accomplishments, and suddenly they are testifying before Congress? As if Substack popularity is what runs the country. Is it? So as long as you can entertain the Substack masses, you can set the legislative principles too?
Blows my mind. I know all about the death of "experts", but we have to take care not to go too far in the other direction. Which is what I see as the Substack Phenomenon.
And no one wants to talk about it in honest terms. When I start seeing truth being swept under the rug like this, I know we have a problem. As in...what is there to hide or deny?
I ask, "Cui bono"? This silencing tactic is what is used in authoritarian regimes. Surely not on Substack?
But the truth is -- this silencing is used regularly on certain Substack sites. And no one bats an eye. Apart from me. In fact, most readers join in to muffle the person who speaks up. Quite disturbing. Then they all go on to wax rhapsodic about democracy and free speech.
if the J6 pipe-bomber was in fact, as has been reported, merely a very naïve, almost autistic-like 30 year old with the mind of a 16 year old, who doesn’t understand a lot of stuff, who acted alone, and was not being manipulated by more sinister forces, (if that really were the case), then to me prosecuting him really does not seem that important. If he was just an errant, ineffective individual with no other violent inclinations, then I would not mind seeing him get off with a mistrial, plea bargain or a very light sentence. But if Mike Benz and others are right, and he was a puppet of the blob, then all of the FBI's efforts should go to profiling him and identifying how he was co-opted. It seems unlikely to me that he acted alone, simply because of the exquisite timing of the placement of the devices for a person who was otherwise politically disengaged. On the other hand, if he was a cutout, there have to be threads that could be pulled and followed leading to his manipulators. The whole thing reminds one so much of the Joseph Conrad story "The Secret Agent".
Almost autistic loner evades the FBI for five years. Is it just me, or is there a very obvious effort to strain credulity in new ways almost every day.
Mike Benz is a fraud who lied about his experience at the State Department, claiming he was “head of cyber” when there is absolutely no record of him doing any “cyber” work at State, was transferred from a low level speech writing job at HUD to State (State never even hired him) and he left his position at state within 3-7 weeks of obtaining it.
Despite this he acts like he has some kind of all encompassing pass to the secrets of the kingdom or at least some up-close first hand knowledge of “how things work.”
In reality he was denied security clearance (twice) because he was so untrustworthy and damaged.
Would anybody here like to talk about how bad you have to fuck up to be denied security clearance twice? Or how it likely has to do with the fact that the government felt he was compromised to the degree that he couldn’t have access to even low-level secrets?
"The Substack System does not allow examination of the Substack System". That is my own insight.
It is so odd that many Substack writers build their sites around examination and dissing of everyone and everything else. But never the very system they are working within themselves, which has little transparency.
I think we need to look into that great big Substack System loophole. And how it is sometimes milked for questionable gain. While the usual groupies on these forums do not notice a thing. You know..."There's a sucker born every minute".
It never ceases to amaze me that minutes after this type of post the comments are filled with outrage. Can they speak first?
About how much they adore Trump and any criticism is either hypocritical, sour grapes or both? They have earned the contempt they are showered with. It’s pathetic.
🙄🙄🙄
We know what one half will do, which is justify and rationalize literally everything the Trump admin does (while seeking a life time appointment from Trump as Librarian of Congress by the way, tiny conflict of interest that Matt seems to happily ignore) and Matt will basically nod along and sometimes say he “doesn’t love” what Trump is doing but that the media is worse.
It’s literally the same formula every week. You can predict with 100% certainty that Walter Kirn will support whatever the current admin is doing. Even when he criticized the previous admin for doing the exact same things, he defends Trump when he does it.
Why would we need to wait to hear which version of idiotic conspiracy thinking Walter will use to apologize for the Trump admin this week before assuming that’s what he will do, since he does it every week?
Last week he was justifying the targeted killing of unarmed civilians by our military not as a one-off mistake but as the proper and just policy going forward - kill civilians. He also justified a war on Venezuela by making up a crack headed theory that fentanyl (which has nothing to do with Venezuela in reality, reality being a place Kirn rarely visits) is the new chemical weapon and weapon of mass destruction. Therefor, any and all acts against both the government and civilian population - up to and including targeting and killing unarmed civilians en mass - are justified.
So again, why wait for the pablum before commenting? You think he’s going to surprise us this week?
The problem is, Andrew, that certain topics which should be discussed are instead silenced or mocked under the regular article forums.
Even Substack (and sometimes especially Substack) uses the Mob Attack against any commenter who dares question the Substack host or the inner working of the Substack System. There are many groupies on each popular Substack site....and they put up formidable hurdles to any comments not showing their particular rock stars in a worshipful celebrity light.
In other words, they drum you off if your comments do not suit their Substack-host fantasies.
So the off-topic issues or awkward questions sometimes find a home here.
In the name of free speech and truthful writing...of course!
🛎️🔨
Your comment is unclear, Andrew. Please be more specific.
I'm guessing K Andrew is talking about the fact that this episode hasn't aired yet.
Thanks, RAO. This comment forum right now is being used for the nebulous issues which are always criticized as being off-topic, or completely silenced under the regular articles.
I used it today as a sort of liminal space, where the supposed unspeakable is spoken.
You take your opportunities where you can find them.
I am surprised that for a journalist of some stature, Matt T. never investigates or even mentions the Substack System. But then Substack has been exceedingly good to Matt, in every way. Ahem. Therefore I may need to do a Bob Woodward/Carl Bernstein move.
Checkmate.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the Substack phenomenon. I enjoy the content and the outlet it gives to independent voices (and even though I’ve been labeled a troll by the true believers for my dissent, I enjoy some of Matt’s content , especially when it come to literature).
But Matt has told us ad nauseam that Substack and people like himself and Joe Rogan are the New Media that will blow a fresh wind through journalism while the MSM withers on the vine because of its irrelevance. Matt, whose own numbers seem to be plummeting now, has equated ratings with credibility, and he has celebrated cutbacks and firings by MSM, which he doesn’t bother to define, but almost invariably refers only to media he considers antagonistic to him. Rogan is a professional bloviator and Matt now has retreated from doing any original reporting (ironically he has been reduced to sifting through revelations he finds out about in the NYT and the WaPo).
I find his posture reductive and hypocritical, and I would like to see a healthy ecosystem that encompasses a wide spectrum of voices.
The problem with a world of Joe Rogans and Matt Taibbi’s is the same thing they advertise as being their advantage— they have no oversight. They have no editors. They have no one to call their BS other than a few voices like mine. And yet they can be as wrongheaded and fallible and stupid as MSM. They exist in a bubble. Making matters worse, they revive the worst abuses of yellow journalism, by feeding their most radicalized bases with sensationalist stories, culture wars and false polemics.
Lastly. I disagree with you wholeheartedly that these two are centrists. Matt professes to be a populist, but his enthusiastically throwing his lot in with the polices of a faux populist billionaire like Trump makes him a reactionary in my book. Kirn is straight up MAGA, he doesn’t hide it.
Not only is Kirn maga, he aspires to be appointed by the administration to the library of congress director.
Matt in print is a super snarky witty fellow. In live debates he is a bashful puppy. He either rolls over for a belly rub from the likes of Kirn, or he pisses all over the floor like he did with mehdi hassan. For those that don’t understand why we hate watch, I personally don’t have the crayons or the inclination to enlighten them
"The problem with a world of Joe Rogans and Matt Taibbi’s is the same thing they advertise as being their advantage— they have no oversight. They have no editors."
I think I have made that same statement about a thousand times on various Substack sites.
It is the Wild West, for good or for bad. Some writers will use it wisely, while others will take full advantage of every loophole and self-serving possibility. I could name a few Substack hosts such as that right now, yet their fans/groupies still worship at their feet. For the same reasons that one-third of Canadians voted for the odious Troodos.
There is no one to reign-in the baddie-ism or those who twist opinion. The Rasputins of the world do exist. And they LOVE Substack. It is a vehicle after their own hearts. Such opportunity!
And let's face it, most people do not realize they are being controlled in the opinion ring, until it all falls apart. Like the Pied Piper mesmerizing the children. They just don't get it. They follow a Pied Piper right over the cliff. Even otherwise intelligent adults.
And have you noted the kind of revenue numbers attached to the most popular Substack sites? Eye-watering. For the kind of writing that about 20% of the literate population can produce. So why don't they? Because you need the connections to start with. Or great PR. Or talent in con-artistry. Take your pick. Simply being a good writer does not do it. In fact, a few of the most popular Substack hosts are not good writers at all. They use gimmicks. They are more like talented scammers.
And some really excellent writers on Substack have so few subscribers that they eventually close shop. It is certainly not all about talent and integrity and worthiness. Contrary to what the average person thinks about Substack.
I have already seen egregious Substack sins that are as bad as those of MSM.
What is this silly idea that human foibles can be bypassed by virtue of using the Substack model?
“ Matt professes to be a populist..”
Sayyyyyyy whaaaaaat?
Indeed. He professes love for the economic populism of the ‘old Bernie’ before he ‘sold out.’ But I can see you mistaking him a member of the Eastern establishment, because ultimately that is where he came from and it is what he is reverting to.
Hey Matt, looking forward to your take on two Trump initiatives that you’ve staked your credibility as a reporter on— DOGE and the Comey, James & Weissman prosecutions. You’ve been very enthusiastic about these actions by Trump. I believe there have been several developments. As much as we’d like your take on influencer Jennifer Welch, this seems a little more worth your time (and ours —assuming Kirn lets you get a word in edgewise).
Mr. Wright, I know you often post here as the antagonist.
I am a centrist myself. I find that Matt and Walter are fairly centrist. Not particularly leftwing or rightwing.
However, like all revenue-generating Substack hosts, they shy very heavily away from discussing the oddities and eyebrow-raising controversies of Substack itself. As in, "Don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg". But where does that leave us? And their credibility?
The unspoken house rules are that no one is allowed to ask about Substack itself, or criticize it, or tell their own account of what hypocritical things have happened to them on Substack "freedom-fighter" sites (which turn out to be more totalitarian than freedom-fighting if a person dares to disagree with the "godly" host).
Where do such Substack hosts think they acquire this degree of authority? Yesterday they were simple freelance writers, if even that. Some of them came from nowhere, with no particular credentials or proven accomplishments, and suddenly they are testifying before Congress? As if Substack popularity is what runs the country. Is it? So as long as you can entertain the Substack masses, you can set the legislative principles too?
Blows my mind. I know all about the death of "experts", but we have to take care not to go too far in the other direction. Which is what I see as the Substack Phenomenon.
And no one wants to talk about it in honest terms. When I start seeing truth being swept under the rug like this, I know we have a problem. As in...what is there to hide or deny?
I ask, "Cui bono"? This silencing tactic is what is used in authoritarian regimes. Surely not on Substack?
But the truth is -- this silencing is used regularly on certain Substack sites. And no one bats an eye. Apart from me. In fact, most readers join in to muffle the person who speaks up. Quite disturbing. Then they all go on to wax rhapsodic about democracy and free speech.
Too funny.
How do I cancel my subscription?
if the J6 pipe-bomber was in fact, as has been reported, merely a very naïve, almost autistic-like 30 year old with the mind of a 16 year old, who doesn’t understand a lot of stuff, who acted alone, and was not being manipulated by more sinister forces, (if that really were the case), then to me prosecuting him really does not seem that important. If he was just an errant, ineffective individual with no other violent inclinations, then I would not mind seeing him get off with a mistrial, plea bargain or a very light sentence. But if Mike Benz and others are right, and he was a puppet of the blob, then all of the FBI's efforts should go to profiling him and identifying how he was co-opted. It seems unlikely to me that he acted alone, simply because of the exquisite timing of the placement of the devices for a person who was otherwise politically disengaged. On the other hand, if he was a cutout, there have to be threads that could be pulled and followed leading to his manipulators. The whole thing reminds one so much of the Joseph Conrad story "The Secret Agent".
Almost autistic loner evades the FBI for five years. Is it just me, or is there a very obvious effort to strain credulity in new ways almost every day.
Mike Benz is a fraud who lied about his experience at the State Department, claiming he was “head of cyber” when there is absolutely no record of him doing any “cyber” work at State, was transferred from a low level speech writing job at HUD to State (State never even hired him) and he left his position at state within 3-7 weeks of obtaining it.
Despite this he acts like he has some kind of all encompassing pass to the secrets of the kingdom or at least some up-close first hand knowledge of “how things work.”
In reality he was denied security clearance (twice) because he was so untrustworthy and damaged.
Would anybody here like to talk about how bad you have to fuck up to be denied security clearance twice? Or how it likely has to do with the fact that the government felt he was compromised to the degree that he couldn’t have access to even low-level secrets?
That Mike Benz?
"The Substack System does not allow examination of the Substack System". That is my own insight.
It is so odd that many Substack writers build their sites around examination and dissing of everyone and everything else. But never the very system they are working within themselves, which has little transparency.
I think we need to look into that great big Substack System loophole. And how it is sometimes milked for questionable gain. While the usual groupies on these forums do not notice a thing. You know..."There's a sucker born every minute".
The trolls are out today. Too bad they’re not particularly good at their job.
elon is a poop face
I wonder how Kirn will justify the targeted killing of unarmed civilians this week.
how much gel will Mr. Kirn put in his hair today? will he bring the vape? is he still sick?
Hey guys Mr. Drudge put out an official Drudge Report app for apple and android. you should get it!