5 ms·

The reason for Alex Jones’ rise and arguably the rise of Trump, AOC, Sanders, and other non-mainstream candidates like Majorie T Greene (to put it lightly) is t

The reason for Alex Jones’ rise and arguably the rise of Trump, AOC, Sanders, and other non-mainstream candidates like Majorie T Greene (to put it lightly) is the continued dying trust in public institutions like mainstream media. Why? The masses on both sides of the spectrum aren’t happy with revelations such as “catch and kill” or lying by omission or delay with the most recent example being stories on Hunter’s laptop. It doesn’t help that the only mainstream media outlet to look at the ties between the Wuhan Virology Institute, the EcoHealth Alliance, and NIAID is Newsweek; while others like The Intercept or Vanity Faire & Rolling Stone are either not mainstream or are primarily entertainment industry periodicals, or just straight up tabloids like the NY Post. Occupy Wall Street and their successors, the meme stock clans, are other symptoms of diving public trust in public institutions, and so is the #EpsteinDidntKillHimself meme. It will only continue to get worse unless something changes, which is highly unlikely when various entities can just pay to kill or influence stories. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/dec/07/china-plan-for-global-media-dominance-propaganda-xi-jinping https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/dec/07/china-plan-for-... http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html (I'm just the messenger.)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Bud 5y ago
Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair are absolutely mainstream, by any standard, and are also not solely "entertainment industry" publications. Seems like you're engaging in a classic No True Scotsman fallacy, here.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- chaostheory 5y ago
  > are also not solely "entertainment industry" publications Historically, Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone covered the TV & movie industries and the music industry respectively. However, you're correct now because both Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair cover stories and topics that traditional mainstream outlets won't touch. The Matt Taibbi op-eds are good examples. Think about it. People are getting hard hitting news from Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair instead of ABC, CBS, NBC, Time, CNN, FOX, NY Times or WSJ; to name a few mainstream outlets.
  - aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 5y ago
    In addition to.
  - FireBeyond 5y ago
    Actually, historically, Rolling Stone has, from Issue 1, had a very substantial political reporting component.
e40 5y ago
One of the most in-depth articles I’ve seen https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-nonprofit-at-the-center-of-the-lab-leak-controversy https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-no...
- chaostheory 5y ago
  That's a good illustration of my point. Something is very wrong when Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair are publishing the stories that should have been in the NYT, Time or CNN. Arguably, The Intercept and The Conversation wouldn't exist either if trust in the traditional mainstream outlets were still high.
arpit 5y ago
I would say the public trust is not so much dying as actively being killed. Also the word mainstream has lost its meaning. If that term is to apply based on audience size, sites like InfoWars were bigger than some of the traditional outlets. The idea of leaving "mainstream" outlets to seek truth on sites like InfoWars is more about people just wanting to hear their biases and not really interested in news per se.
- chaostheory 5y ago
  > I would say the public trust is not so much dying as actively being killed. I feel that we agree aside from semantics. I still would choose dying over killed because it looks like a gradual year over year trend rather than a giant, sudden change. > Also the word mainstream has lost its meaning. To be clear, I wanted to differentiate sane & plausible media outlets from the fringe outlets like Infowars or upstarts like The Intercept > The idea of leaving "mainstream" outlets to seek truth on sites like InfoWars is more about people just wanting to hear their biases and not really interested in news per se. This was true in decades prior. However, it's starting to snowball with continued polarization of the both left and right, eventually resulting in political moderates being a minority. Isn't it strange that Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone are now covering stories on both COVID-19 and Wall Street? imo it's out of necessity because the media outlets, who traditionally cover these topics, refuse to cover the stories with the same depth.
ant_li0n 5y ago
Honestly I feel like the failing is one of media literacy and critical thinking, as opposed to trust in institutions, as you propose. On the side of the media, it's a sortof cynical appraisal of their readers/viewers ("It's too complicated"). Take the Hunter Biden laptop thing, for example. I don't know too much about it, but my understanding is that it revealed nepotism/influence peddling, which I totally agree should be prohibited. I mean most people are in favor of preventing members of Congress from trading stocks, for example. It's something pretty much all of us can agree on. But instead of the story of the laptop being used as a jumping off point to talk about these issues, the news organizations decided to squash the story, thinking its readers/viewers were not sophisticated enough to be able to digest it, and that it would simply be used as a weapon by the Republicans (sad to say with, I agree). Personally I feel like they should have fully covered the story. I also believe that Trump would have been re-elected, and that this would have been a bad thing for the entire world. Squashing the story might have led to a short-term win, but maybe perpetuate the problem longer. I really hope things turn around. I want to have hope for the future. It's pretty hard though, I don't have much trust that we are up to the challenge.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  The laptop story was so way out there it was only fit for tabloid publication. It wasn’t squashed so much that it was the story about a blind computer repairman who thought he recognized the former Vice President’s son in Delaware who is somehow so renowned that he attracts business all the way from Los Angeles. Even the Republicans didn’t feel comfortable seriously running with it.
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    I don't think anybody is claiming Hunter went all the way to Delaware to repair his laptop. The Bidens have a house in Delaware so it is reasonable to suspect that Hunter was already in the state.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      If that’s what they were going with sure. I guess it could have been any random computer repair shop in any state, but how often do you take your MacBooks to get repaired at some random place when visiting your parents, and leave them there since you live in LA anyways? On the other hand, it’s such a shoddy setup I doubt any half way decent intelligence agency would plant the laptop there. But maybe blind computer repair people just aren’t that common?
dikkechill 5y ago
I agree with you on the issue with trust. The Atlantic compares the US developments from the last 10 years with what happened to the tower of Babel: "Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech." https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-...
- chaostheory 5y ago
  The main thing that I find wrong with this article is that it lays all the blame on social media. While it is a valid point, the mainstream media is also culpable for the public's growing lack of trust. It's disingenuous when it's not part of the conversation.
infamouscow 5y ago
I agree with your observations. I think part of the problem is BOTH political parties demonize their opponents rather than make intellectual arguments on policy. This makes politics feel existential at the federal level, because it's framed as being about good vs. evil rather than the substance of the policy. The public's trust in institutions will continue to erode until there is no trust remaining soley because every eight years or so BOTH political parties equate losing to the end of the world. The path we're on leads to radical defederalization of the government.
- chaostheory 5y ago
  > I think part of the problem is BOTH political parties demonize their opponents rather than make intellectual arguments on policy. This started with Newt. Newt Gingrich is primarily responsible for modern partisan politics https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gingrich-says-youre-welcome/570832/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gi... I still strongly feel that the mainstream media deserves a larger portion of the blame.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Bud 5y ago

Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair are absolutely mainstream, by any standard, and are also not solely "entertainment industry" publications. Seems like you're engaging in a classic No True Scotsman fallacy, here.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chaostheory 5y ago
> are also not solely "entertainment industry" publications Historically, Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone covered the TV & movie industries and the music industry respectively. However, you're correct now because both Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair cover stories and topics that traditional mainstream outlets won't touch. The Matt Taibbi op-eds are good examples. Think about it. People are getting hard hitting news from Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair instead of ABC, CBS, NBC, Time, CNN, FOX, NY Times or WSJ; to name a few mainstream outlets.
- aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 5y ago
  In addition to.
- FireBeyond 5y ago
  Actually, historically, Rolling Stone has, from Issue 1, had a very substantial political reporting component.

e40 5y ago

One of the most in-depth articles I’ve seen https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-nonprofit-at-the-center-of-the-lab-leak-controversy https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/03/the-virus-hunting-no...

chaostheory 5y ago
That's a good illustration of my point. Something is very wrong when Rolling Stone and Vanity Fair are publishing the stories that should have been in the NYT, Time or CNN. Arguably, The Intercept and The Conversation wouldn't exist either if trust in the traditional mainstream outlets were still high.

arpit 5y ago

I would say the public trust is not so much dying as actively being killed. Also the word mainstream has lost its meaning. If that term is to apply based on audience size, sites like InfoWars were bigger than some of the traditional outlets. The idea of leaving "mainstream" outlets to seek truth on sites like InfoWars is more about people just wanting to hear their biases and not really interested in news per se.

chaostheory 5y ago
> I would say the public trust is not so much dying as actively being killed. I feel that we agree aside from semantics. I still would choose dying over killed because it looks like a gradual year over year trend rather than a giant, sudden change. > Also the word mainstream has lost its meaning. To be clear, I wanted to differentiate sane & plausible media outlets from the fringe outlets like Infowars or upstarts like The Intercept > The idea of leaving "mainstream" outlets to seek truth on sites like InfoWars is more about people just wanting to hear their biases and not really interested in news per se. This was true in decades prior. However, it's starting to snowball with continued polarization of the both left and right, eventually resulting in political moderates being a minority. Isn't it strange that Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone are now covering stories on both COVID-19 and Wall Street? imo it's out of necessity because the media outlets, who traditionally cover these topics, refuse to cover the stories with the same depth.

ant_li0n 5y ago

Honestly I feel like the failing is one of media literacy and critical thinking, as opposed to trust in institutions, as you propose. On the side of the media, it's a sortof cynical appraisal of their readers/viewers ("It's too complicated"). Take the Hunter Biden laptop thing, for example. I don't know too much about it, but my understanding is that it revealed nepotism/influence peddling, which I totally agree should be prohibited. I mean most people are in favor of preventing members of Congress from trading stocks, for example. It's something pretty much all of us can agree on. But instead of the story of the laptop being used as a jumping off point to talk about these issues, the news organizations decided to squash the story, thinking its readers/viewers were not sophisticated enough to be able to digest it, and that it would simply be used as a weapon by the Republicans (sad to say with, I agree). Personally I feel like they should have fully covered the story. I also believe that Trump would have been re-elected, and that this would have been a bad thing for the entire world. Squashing the story might have led to a short-term win, but maybe perpetuate the problem longer. I really hope things turn around. I want to have hope for the future. It's pretty hard though, I don't have much trust that we are up to the challenge.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
The laptop story was so way out there it was only fit for tabloid publication. It wasn’t squashed so much that it was the story about a blind computer repairman who thought he recognized the former Vice President’s son in Delaware who is somehow so renowned that he attracts business all the way from Los Angeles. Even the Republicans didn’t feel comfortable seriously running with it.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  I don't think anybody is claiming Hunter went all the way to Delaware to repair his laptop. The Bidens have a house in Delaware so it is reasonable to suspect that Hunter was already in the state.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    If that’s what they were going with sure. I guess it could have been any random computer repair shop in any state, but how often do you take your MacBooks to get repaired at some random place when visiting your parents, and leave them there since you live in LA anyways? On the other hand, it’s such a shoddy setup I doubt any half way decent intelligence agency would plant the laptop there. But maybe blind computer repair people just aren’t that common?

dikkechill 5y ago

I agree with you on the issue with trust. The Atlantic compares the US developments from the last 10 years with what happened to the tower of Babel: "Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech." https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-...

chaostheory 5y ago
The main thing that I find wrong with this article is that it lays all the blame on social media. While it is a valid point, the mainstream media is also culpable for the public's growing lack of trust. It's disingenuous when it's not part of the conversation.

infamouscow 5y ago

I agree with your observations. I think part of the problem is BOTH political parties demonize their opponents rather than make intellectual arguments on policy. This makes politics feel existential at the federal level, because it's framed as being about good vs. evil rather than the substance of the policy. The public's trust in institutions will continue to erode until there is no trust remaining soley because every eight years or so BOTH political parties equate losing to the end of the world. The path we're on leads to radical defederalization of the government.

chaostheory 5y ago
> I think part of the problem is BOTH political parties demonize their opponents rather than make intellectual arguments on policy. This started with Newt. Newt Gingrich is primarily responsible for modern partisan politics https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gingrich-says-youre-welcome/570832/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gi... I still strongly feel that the mainstream media deserves a larger portion of the blame.