Totally agree, I also subscribe to one traditional newspaper that does investigative journalism. It is critical for democracy to function to have journalists who hold government to account. It is an investment for the future
They, (those who have no real names) the bots have been weaponised, I can spot them (most of the time). Some friends are working on an algorithm that will filter in real time, in one of the AI labs in my developers file. Though not yet complete very promising. What ever becomes of the fascist fools Karmic retribution set served very cold... It’s on the way been waiting for this day since 2007. Finally thank you.
Used to subscribe to New York times, Chicago Trib, still subscribed to Wall Street Journal but believe less than 10% of what I read. Used to flip between Fox News 75% of the time and CNN 25% of the time. Completely cut that cord. Going to sub stack to read from all different political positions and support writers they give me better information without the absolute steaming pile of horse crap propaganda shoved down our throat everyday but all government agencies and corporate media.
It's all about basic constitutional rights, the rest we can quibble about later.
It’s a damn shame that we have to pay in order to be told the truth, but since we apparently do, I’m absolutely content to be giving my money to you three truly inspiring people.
It's odd to have to say this, but paying for someone to do journalism is neither new nor problematic. The problem is that almost all the so-called journalists today are paid not to do (real) journalism.
Since I just saw this today, it's topical. This is from the Guardian's currently standard plea for donations at the bottom of free news pages: "And we avoid the trap that befalls much US media – the tendency, born of a desire to please all sides, to engage in false equivalence in the name of neutrality. While fairness guides everything we do, we know there is a right and a wrong position in the fight against racism and for reproductive justice. When we report on issues like the climate crisis, we’re not afraid to name who is responsible. "
The Guardian has fallen so damn far from being the publication that partnered with Glenn Greenwald, Wikileaks, Edward Snowden.
And the appeal you’ve highlighted makes no damn sense. Credibility is all a publication has. And there they are putting right out into the open that not only are they biased, they’re actually *more* biased than famously biased publications.
Bias isn't the same as lying. Even the letters I write to my friends and family are biased. I take into account their prejudices and feelings. I don't want to be rude. Besides, if I offend them too much they'll stop reading. What's the good in that?
The modern attitude though tends to be "it's impossible to be perfectly unbiased. There is no such thing as truth, only texts! So I may as well lie my ass off." While this can be effective it's not what I'm looking for. There may not be such a thing as truth, but you can get a lot closer if you try.
I expect all my sources to be biased but minimally so. If they are funded by X then they aren't going to criticize X. That's just life. That's one reason it is so important that funding be disclosed openly. A practice that sadly has fallen into abeyance.
If someone like the Guardian wants to be partisan, if that's what sells, fine, as long as they are open about it. I don't have to read it, and I don't. (Along with many other such sources.)
Why is it a shame to pay? It's better than having to look at advertising, or even worse, government funded news, like BBC or NPR. Advertisers represent large corporations, who tend to back all this repression when they can get a chance, too.
Loved Matt’s article and needn’t offer up more kudos than have already been given. This comment will be off topic of Matt’s article but on topic to this comment.
While Substack is a major improvement on current day journalism, its economics all but ensure a limited audience. I pay for Matt and Greenwald but no others. Why? Too expensive. There are no single read paywalls that allow one to read and pay for a single article, perhaps triggered after reading a portion of the article as Substack does now. The difference is allowing a single read vs. compelling a reader to pay an expensive annual subscription. The cost of an article could be priced according to its popularity up to a limit. Blockchain micropayments are ideally designed for this (yes, there are chains that offer transaction fees of $0.000001), but that is a topic for another day. It is conceivable that Matt and other journalists on Substack could make as much or more than they do now by expanding their reach via micropayment driven reading.
Meanwhile, all of us here are just a small group of truth seekers destined to remain just that: small. Matt, Substack, et. al, think bigger please. Pay attention to the economics
I would love to see a variation on the previous Medium-type model where journalists are paid for reading time on individual articles but users also have the option to subscribe. Same here - I would subscribe to GG, Hedges, Hersh and many others but that adds up to an unmanageable amount in a tight economy.
Matt - I, like most of your subscribers I'm sure, feel like supporting you is our patriotic duty. Yeah, I know, that sounds corny. But it's true. Most of the public sits out in the wilderness and is feed news by co opted media. There really are so few out there willing to dig for the truth, and expose it. Now I have come to realize big media is bought off. Lobbyists from big Pharma, big Tech, big Oil, etc. are going to get "favorable" treatment. But I NEVER would have believed that something that so caught the government and big tech so dead to rights would be completely ignored by the mainstream media. Astonishing. That's why a handful of people's persistence and this judge's ruling feels game changing - though it will never be reported on the nightly news or MSM cable networks. Thank you Matt!
I understand, but it's not corny in the least! it's these 'corny' thoughts of patriotism, duty, leaving the country to the next generation better than we found it, upholding the constitution....simply seek to be part of the solution instead of just another idiot who makes everything worse
Welcome to your new position at the Ministry of Truth. Together we protect America from untruth.
We feel this will prove a productive and mutually beneficial partnership. There however are a few things you must know. The first is,
There is no Ministry of Truth.
Should you be asked if there is a Ministry of Truth, possible responses are "Stooge of Putin!", "Take off your tinfoil hat," or silently taking a drag on your cigarette then exhale while staring into the distance over the head of your interlocutor.
Please proceed to Room 202 to register. Have a nice day.
Years from now your kids are going to look back on what you've done, and be filled with pride of their dad who is one hell of a journalist. May you live long and prosper!
Thank you, Matt! The work you and Shellenberger in particular have been doing the last couple of years has been a godsend. Not only is the money I spend here ridiculously worthwhile, but I can honestly say Im proud to have been a subscriber since you started your substack. History will remember the work you have done.
It's always enlightening to read your work. Sometimes it's not a pleasure because of the atrocious things you uncover. But it's good to know someone is keeping the pressure on those who think they're above the law.
I think you should read a book by Matt Taibbi called "the divide". It might make you take second or third look at the idea that these people "....think they're above the law."
Thanks. I'll check it out. Just reading the synopsis, I believe he's right.
On a smaller scale than the book, I've always said that DAs want convictions so cops go after those least likely to fight back. Mommy and Daddy are going to fight when their rich kid gets busted with pot on the way home. Even though it might be an easy conviction, they have the money for lawyers to poke at every thread and tie it up in court.
The administration was told to stop doing something they were never allowed to do in the first place. Ignore this, and they ignore the very basis of their right to rule. Nevertheless, my question is less whether our benevolent betters will try to get around this, but how. I don’t think the fight is over.
Thank you for the small sliver of hope some of us have left. I truly think you are doing it the right way, and maybe just maybe a sense of conscience will emerge with some of these people who think they run the show. P
Great job, Matt! Thank you so much for all the hard work you do.
Matt, Bari, and Michael are an isle of actual journalism in a sea of partisan hypocrisy masquerading as journalism.
Keep up the great fight, Matt!
Yes Matt, great work. And thank you for thanking! It's nourishing and important for us to know that something helps, maybe even sticks.
If our support makes even a little difference to you, that makes a big difference to me.
Ditto to Ashby McDonald’s comment.
This subscription is my proudest investment - thank you for all you do!
"Investing in the Truth". I like it!
Lies pay better, at least in the short term.
You're right, but I think that's less true than it used to be.
“You can go very far on a lie, but you’ll have no hope of returning.” Jewish proverb
Is it not abundantly obvious that we ever always only have been ruled by glorified sociopaths?
The Hindus had to come up with reincarnation, because there is no justice to be had in this life.
Outside of the MSM's ever-shrinking circle, the Pulitzer Prize is becoming almost a scarlet letter.
Dunno, old bean. See CNN layoffs for a good example.
I'm sure their severance packages won't have the poor dears reduced to eating cat food.
Never thought of it as an "investment" Marica . . . but right you are. I am in total accord.
Yep.
Ditto
Likewise.
Totally agree, I also subscribe to one traditional newspaper that does investigative journalism. It is critical for democracy to function to have journalists who hold government to account. It is an investment for the future
An investment in truth pays good dividends! 😉👍
Same! My moral duty.
They, (those who have no real names) the bots have been weaponised, I can spot them (most of the time). Some friends are working on an algorithm that will filter in real time, in one of the AI labs in my developers file. Though not yet complete very promising. What ever becomes of the fascist fools Karmic retribution set served very cold... It’s on the way been waiting for this day since 2007. Finally thank you.
Ditto!!
Used to subscribe to New York times, Chicago Trib, still subscribed to Wall Street Journal but believe less than 10% of what I read. Used to flip between Fox News 75% of the time and CNN 25% of the time. Completely cut that cord. Going to sub stack to read from all different political positions and support writers they give me better information without the absolute steaming pile of horse crap propaganda shoved down our throat everyday but all government agencies and corporate media.
It's all about basic constitutional rights, the rest we can quibble about later.
Party on Matt! You fully deserve it!
Party on, Fig!
like it's 1999
the Purple one is smiling now from a better place!
We are a nice interesting group here. Welcome.
Watching the WaPo and NYT seethe and cope gives me enduring satisfaction.
me too!
It’s a damn shame that we have to pay in order to be told the truth, but since we apparently do, I’m absolutely content to be giving my money to you three truly inspiring people.
Yup! I'd much rather pay for the truth than continue receiving lies for free.
The lies are costly. Very costly.
Substack is less than a daily print newspaper.
Great line!
It's odd to have to say this, but paying for someone to do journalism is neither new nor problematic. The problem is that almost all the so-called journalists today are paid not to do (real) journalism.
MSM journalists fulfill a function similar to that of fluffers to power, or perhaps renaissance courtiers, but without the colorful outfits.
You crack me up! Thank you!
The fluffers or the courtiers?
Since I just saw this today, it's topical. This is from the Guardian's currently standard plea for donations at the bottom of free news pages: "And we avoid the trap that befalls much US media – the tendency, born of a desire to please all sides, to engage in false equivalence in the name of neutrality. While fairness guides everything we do, we know there is a right and a wrong position in the fight against racism and for reproductive justice. When we report on issues like the climate crisis, we’re not afraid to name who is responsible. "
Scary stuff!
The Guardian has fallen so damn far from being the publication that partnered with Glenn Greenwald, Wikileaks, Edward Snowden.
And the appeal you’ve highlighted makes no damn sense. Credibility is all a publication has. And there they are putting right out into the open that not only are they biased, they’re actually *more* biased than famously biased publications.
The Guardian has turned to shyte.
Such frankness boosts their credibility, if you ask me. Not that I read their stuff anymore.
I sort of see what you’re getting at, but ultimately it cannot boost credibility to be frank about your lack of credibility.
Bias isn't the same as lying. Even the letters I write to my friends and family are biased. I take into account their prejudices and feelings. I don't want to be rude. Besides, if I offend them too much they'll stop reading. What's the good in that?
The modern attitude though tends to be "it's impossible to be perfectly unbiased. There is no such thing as truth, only texts! So I may as well lie my ass off." While this can be effective it's not what I'm looking for. There may not be such a thing as truth, but you can get a lot closer if you try.
I expect all my sources to be biased but minimally so. If they are funded by X then they aren't going to criticize X. That's just life. That's one reason it is so important that funding be disclosed openly. A practice that sadly has fallen into abeyance.
If someone like the Guardian wants to be partisan, if that's what sells, fine, as long as they are open about it. I don't have to read it, and I don't. (Along with many other such sources.)
That is some authentic frontier gibberish from the Guardian, right there.
Rebburrrrr!
Clearly AI, or another libtard journo grad. No difference really.
As Dave Rubin has often said, "If you don't pay for the product, you ARE the product."
Why is it a shame to pay? It's better than having to look at advertising, or even worse, government funded news, like BBC or NPR. Advertisers represent large corporations, who tend to back all this repression when they can get a chance, too.
Loved Matt’s article and needn’t offer up more kudos than have already been given. This comment will be off topic of Matt’s article but on topic to this comment.
While Substack is a major improvement on current day journalism, its economics all but ensure a limited audience. I pay for Matt and Greenwald but no others. Why? Too expensive. There are no single read paywalls that allow one to read and pay for a single article, perhaps triggered after reading a portion of the article as Substack does now. The difference is allowing a single read vs. compelling a reader to pay an expensive annual subscription. The cost of an article could be priced according to its popularity up to a limit. Blockchain micropayments are ideally designed for this (yes, there are chains that offer transaction fees of $0.000001), but that is a topic for another day. It is conceivable that Matt and other journalists on Substack could make as much or more than they do now by expanding their reach via micropayment driven reading.
Meanwhile, all of us here are just a small group of truth seekers destined to remain just that: small. Matt, Substack, et. al, think bigger please. Pay attention to the economics
I would love to see a variation on the previous Medium-type model where journalists are paid for reading time on individual articles but users also have the option to subscribe. Same here - I would subscribe to GG, Hedges, Hersh and many others but that adds up to an unmanageable amount in a tight economy.
It's a great use of our/my money. I am so happy that Matt, Michael, Bari are there
for me to contribute to!!
I don’t like free stuff. It means I’m the product.
Matt - I, like most of your subscribers I'm sure, feel like supporting you is our patriotic duty. Yeah, I know, that sounds corny. But it's true. Most of the public sits out in the wilderness and is feed news by co opted media. There really are so few out there willing to dig for the truth, and expose it. Now I have come to realize big media is bought off. Lobbyists from big Pharma, big Tech, big Oil, etc. are going to get "favorable" treatment. But I NEVER would have believed that something that so caught the government and big tech so dead to rights would be completely ignored by the mainstream media. Astonishing. That's why a handful of people's persistence and this judge's ruling feels game changing - though it will never be reported on the nightly news or MSM cable networks. Thank you Matt!
Them ignoring it pretty much says it all doesn’t it?
I understand, but it's not corny in the least! it's these 'corny' thoughts of patriotism, duty, leaving the country to the next generation better than we found it, upholding the constitution....simply seek to be part of the solution instead of just another idiot who makes everything worse
Welcome to your new position at the Ministry of Truth. Together we protect America from untruth.
We feel this will prove a productive and mutually beneficial partnership. There however are a few things you must know. The first is,
There is no Ministry of Truth.
Should you be asked if there is a Ministry of Truth, possible responses are "Stooge of Putin!", "Take off your tinfoil hat," or silently taking a drag on your cigarette then exhale while staring into the distance over the head of your interlocutor.
Please proceed to Room 202 to register. Have a nice day.
Years from now your kids are going to look back on what you've done, and be filled with pride of their dad who is one hell of a journalist. May you live long and prosper!
Thank you, Matt! The work you and Shellenberger in particular have been doing the last couple of years has been a godsend. Not only is the money I spend here ridiculously worthwhile, but I can honestly say Im proud to have been a subscriber since you started your substack. History will remember the work you have done.
The ruling is a solid, well deserved atta boy. Notch the W.
A rare bit of sanity emerges - thanks for keeping the faith - free speech must be absolute - not filtered by the government.
Keep pressing, the powers that be will continue to attack. F them.
It's always enlightening to read your work. Sometimes it's not a pleasure because of the atrocious things you uncover. But it's good to know someone is keeping the pressure on those who think they're above the law.
I think you should read a book by Matt Taibbi called "the divide". It might make you take second or third look at the idea that these people "....think they're above the law."
Thanks. I'll check it out. Just reading the synopsis, I believe he's right.
On a smaller scale than the book, I've always said that DAs want convictions so cops go after those least likely to fight back. Mommy and Daddy are going to fight when their rich kid gets busted with pot on the way home. Even though it might be an easy conviction, they have the money for lawyers to poke at every thread and tie it up in court.
The administration was told to stop doing something they were never allowed to do in the first place. Ignore this, and they ignore the very basis of their right to rule. Nevertheless, my question is less whether our benevolent betters will try to get around this, but how. I don’t think the fight is over.
Dead on comment, in every respect.
Oh Matt, we love all you guys -- you, Walter, Michael, and Bari!!!!!!
You go Matt!
Thank you for the small sliver of hope some of us have left. I truly think you are doing it the right way, and maybe just maybe a sense of conscience will emerge with some of these people who think they run the show. P
Small sliver is correct
Yeah. Small Shawshank Sliver. But it never dies.
The pangs of regret tend to show up after the bully is exposed and crushed, not usually before.
"I was just following orders. I was misled. I always doubted the system, but was afraid to say anything." And so forth.