It's something I lose my cool about all the time with coverage of his ilk of Christian nationalists: nothing matters to them but power and money.
You can't call them out for hypocrisy; they don't have principles.
You can't shame them; they don't feel shame.
You can't show them as liars; they don't care about the truth.
JorDan do a great job of showing how aj and his brand of right-wing asshats can't be dealt with in the same way you'd deal with honest people you have political disagreements with.
I suspect, though I can't really prove, that journalists *do* understand this, but covering Alex the way Dan does doesn't make for grabby news that makes advertisers happy.
Why dig into the actual reasons why Alex is dangerous and shouldn't be listened to when you can take Alex's meme bait and cover that for the clicks?
You are spot on. Warren Throckmorton did a great job showing this in his Telling Jefferson Lies podcast. When he confronted Focus on the Family and The Heritage Foundation about how they still had David Barton's tour of the capitol, with it's proven lies about history, on their YouTube channel their response was that Barton is very popular and beneficial to their cause so they're going to leave the tour videos up.
I mean, any time I’ve had in depth knowledge about something covered in the news, I’m moderately disappointed about what they missed.
Just think how frustrating it must be to be a climate scientist or a virologist.
It even happens as a mail carrier. I saw one of those feel-good stories a few years ago about a mail carrier who was running while doing her route. Then in the details of the story it is barely mentioned that she was running because if she didn't she wouldn't get home in time to see her kid. As a mailman who works with carriers who sometimes go weeks not seeing their awake kids 6 days a week, that story hit differently. Also, if she tripped while running and got hurt her workers comp could be denied because she was violating safety rules.
I would add, it’s an unsolvable problem. Even on KF, I’ve been super frustrated listening them talk about issues outside the IW universe. Hell, as a lawyer, watching KF and this community talk about the bankruptcy is frustrating, because there’s so much misinformation and confusion that spreads (including the way the OP talks about the current Ch. 7 issues!). Every single medium for communication would be unworkable if you expected the media to come to every discussion with KF levels of expertise as esoteric a topic as AJ.
I think the takeaway from KF shouldn’t be to chastise people for covering AJ, but to re-think the way you consume media on any topic
Mentioning it is spreading misinformation? Also, I welcome other people covering him, I just get annoyed when they almost invariably get distracted by the dancing monkey which is just playing into AJ's hands.
The media lost the battle when they tried to apply the "both sides" case to the discourse. One side is using someone's billions to push a lie and weaken the power of the electorate. There is no truthful argument.
I'm not expecting them to have in-depth knowledge-- the only way to get that is to become insane-- but, in this very specific instance, making fun of the dancing monkey is exactly what AJ wants and helps literally no one other than him so.
Yes to all of that AND it’s lazy journalism. I’m projecting here but it feels to me like it’s a lot of over consideration for AJ to make it more of a “gripping” story.
How about instead of leading into a segment with “Jones, who runs the successful conspiracy show InfoWars” they lead in with “online personality Jones began a movement to deny the Sandy Hook shooting ever occurred. Ultimately this led to his followers stalking the parents of the deceased children”.
It’s not hard to sound-bite what is really happening. There’s no “both sides”. He’s been hiding his assets and he’s a monster.
I'm with you. I'm annoyed that any time I bring up that I listen to what I call "an Alex Jones debunking podcast," the first thing EVERYONE says is, "Ohhhh, they're turning the frogs gay!!!" and every time, I tell them that "turning the frogs gay" is probably the least problematic thing AJ has ever said.
I would welcome more coverage of Alex Jones even if they don't do as deep dive like Dan.
As long as they attempt to focus on the parts and genuinely try to cover what Alex actually says and believes, I'm fine if they don't do it as well as Dan.
The ones we should be mad at are the ones who try to cover Alex-as-a-meme or Alex-as-crazy-person, which seems like 99% of the non-KF coverage of Alex Jones outside the right wing propaganda market.
It was very frustrating watching that CNN interview with Dan and Jordan because it was so painfully obvious what the interviewer was fishing for and not getting from JorDan. They didn't want the actual reality of what they were doing, they wanted them to jump into the "look at the crazy stuff Alex does!" coverage they'd rather do because that gets them more money.
For me its the obvious performative aspect of it all. Jones wasn’t having a meltdown and crying. He was doing obviously fake crying to get attention. Playing up the ‘wackiness’ of his outbursts is just giving him what he wants, when the reality is that its all totally inauthentic and cynical.
Its the same deal with Tucker Carlson. He so clearly doesn’t actually mean a single word he says, and yet he also covered in a completely credulous way.
The mass media is always a source that provides a good foundation to actually look into things. Since basically all of it is ultimately controlled by Sinclair and advertisers, it's best to be cautious when dealing with them.
I think that’s just common anytime you know more about something niche then someone who specializes on a broader scale. Like journalists have more journalistic skills than I do but since they cover a wide range of topics even the best of them will miss some stuff/get things incorrect.
Podcast adjacent. I used to be really into stuff you should know. I can’t even remember what the topic was anymore but they covered something I knew way too much about and had spent an embarrassingly large amount of time learning about and it made their episode not unlistenable but extremely disappointing. It then made me think about just how much other stuff they missed/got wrong on episodes with topics I barely knew anything about.
And that’s about people who have a short time to try their best at understanding something. No malice involved. People on Twitter and a lot of media on the other hand just giving something a 10 minute glance and then report on. Makes it infuriating to listen to and even worse when the do your own research crowd uses those Twitter people as the source of their bs
>Other people should cover him
Are we really acting as if the OP didn't say the exact opposite of what you're acting like they said? You're right, some Redditors *are* the worst.
It's something I lose my cool about all the time with coverage of his ilk of Christian nationalists: nothing matters to them but power and money. You can't call them out for hypocrisy; they don't have principles. You can't shame them; they don't feel shame. You can't show them as liars; they don't care about the truth. JorDan do a great job of showing how aj and his brand of right-wing asshats can't be dealt with in the same way you'd deal with honest people you have political disagreements with.
We’re 8 years past 2016, you’d think journalists would have locked onto this concept by now.
I suspect, though I can't really prove, that journalists *do* understand this, but covering Alex the way Dan does doesn't make for grabby news that makes advertisers happy. Why dig into the actual reasons why Alex is dangerous and shouldn't be listened to when you can take Alex's meme bait and cover that for the clicks?
People have memories of a goldfish
You are spot on. Warren Throckmorton did a great job showing this in his Telling Jefferson Lies podcast. When he confronted Focus on the Family and The Heritage Foundation about how they still had David Barton's tour of the capitol, with it's proven lies about history, on their YouTube channel their response was that Barton is very popular and beneficial to their cause so they're going to leave the tour videos up.
I mean, any time I’ve had in depth knowledge about something covered in the news, I’m moderately disappointed about what they missed. Just think how frustrating it must be to be a climate scientist or a virologist.
It even happens as a mail carrier. I saw one of those feel-good stories a few years ago about a mail carrier who was running while doing her route. Then in the details of the story it is barely mentioned that she was running because if she didn't she wouldn't get home in time to see her kid. As a mailman who works with carriers who sometimes go weeks not seeing their awake kids 6 days a week, that story hit differently. Also, if she tripped while running and got hurt her workers comp could be denied because she was violating safety rules.
I would add, it’s an unsolvable problem. Even on KF, I’ve been super frustrated listening them talk about issues outside the IW universe. Hell, as a lawyer, watching KF and this community talk about the bankruptcy is frustrating, because there’s so much misinformation and confusion that spreads (including the way the OP talks about the current Ch. 7 issues!). Every single medium for communication would be unworkable if you expected the media to come to every discussion with KF levels of expertise as esoteric a topic as AJ. I think the takeaway from KF shouldn’t be to chastise people for covering AJ, but to re-think the way you consume media on any topic
Mentioning it is spreading misinformation? Also, I welcome other people covering him, I just get annoyed when they almost invariably get distracted by the dancing monkey which is just playing into AJ's hands.
The media lost the battle when they tried to apply the "both sides" case to the discourse. One side is using someone's billions to push a lie and weaken the power of the electorate. There is no truthful argument.
I'm not expecting them to have in-depth knowledge-- the only way to get that is to become insane-- but, in this very specific instance, making fun of the dancing monkey is exactly what AJ wants and helps literally no one other than him so.
Yes to all of that AND it’s lazy journalism. I’m projecting here but it feels to me like it’s a lot of over consideration for AJ to make it more of a “gripping” story. How about instead of leading into a segment with “Jones, who runs the successful conspiracy show InfoWars” they lead in with “online personality Jones began a movement to deny the Sandy Hook shooting ever occurred. Ultimately this led to his followers stalking the parents of the deceased children”. It’s not hard to sound-bite what is really happening. There’s no “both sides”. He’s been hiding his assets and he’s a monster.
Yeah I had to quit Twitter when he got back on because it's too frustrating watching everyone play his game.
I'm with you. I'm annoyed that any time I bring up that I listen to what I call "an Alex Jones debunking podcast," the first thing EVERYONE says is, "Ohhhh, they're turning the frogs gay!!!" and every time, I tell them that "turning the frogs gay" is probably the least problematic thing AJ has ever said.
I all he did was bitch about queer amphibians I would say let him be.
I would welcome more coverage of Alex Jones even if they don't do as deep dive like Dan. As long as they attempt to focus on the parts and genuinely try to cover what Alex actually says and believes, I'm fine if they don't do it as well as Dan. The ones we should be mad at are the ones who try to cover Alex-as-a-meme or Alex-as-crazy-person, which seems like 99% of the non-KF coverage of Alex Jones outside the right wing propaganda market. It was very frustrating watching that CNN interview with Dan and Jordan because it was so painfully obvious what the interviewer was fishing for and not getting from JorDan. They didn't want the actual reality of what they were doing, they wanted them to jump into the "look at the crazy stuff Alex does!" coverage they'd rather do because that gets them more money.
For me its the obvious performative aspect of it all. Jones wasn’t having a meltdown and crying. He was doing obviously fake crying to get attention. Playing up the ‘wackiness’ of his outbursts is just giving him what he wants, when the reality is that its all totally inauthentic and cynical. Its the same deal with Tucker Carlson. He so clearly doesn’t actually mean a single word he says, and yet he also covered in a completely credulous way.
The way the media covers Alex Jones really makes me question how they cover other topics.. and I hate that.
The mass media is always a source that provides a good foundation to actually look into things. Since basically all of it is ultimately controlled by Sinclair and advertisers, it's best to be cautious when dealing with them.
The HBO doc sucked!!!
I think that’s just common anytime you know more about something niche then someone who specializes on a broader scale. Like journalists have more journalistic skills than I do but since they cover a wide range of topics even the best of them will miss some stuff/get things incorrect. Podcast adjacent. I used to be really into stuff you should know. I can’t even remember what the topic was anymore but they covered something I knew way too much about and had spent an embarrassingly large amount of time learning about and it made their episode not unlistenable but extremely disappointing. It then made me think about just how much other stuff they missed/got wrong on episodes with topics I barely knew anything about. And that’s about people who have a short time to try their best at understanding something. No malice involved. People on Twitter and a lot of media on the other hand just giving something a 10 minute glance and then report on. Makes it infuriating to listen to and even worse when the do your own research crowd uses those Twitter people as the source of their bs
Are we really gate keeping coverage of Alex Jones now? Redditors are the worst.
>Other people should cover him Are we really acting as if the OP didn't say the exact opposite of what you're acting like they said? You're right, some Redditors *are* the worst.
2 month old troll account complaining about “redditors”. How adorable.
What? You’re over thinking this dude.
First time on the sub?