Bari Weiss should be given a listen to

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

wayne, the american people threw president trump out on his rump as soon as they could.

If the FBI is telling social media what stories to bury, that’s a problem because FBI officials aren’t elected. We can’t vote them out if we don’t like what they’re doing. That’s why it’s a bad idea for unelected bureaucrats to have a lot of power.

That’s why it’s a threat to democracy. With elected politicians, we can always un-elect them. Can’t do that with FBI agents or Dr Faucci. So people
like that shouldn’t be setting policy. They should be advising those who do.

This doesn’t mean i think January 6th was a good thing. It’s a separate issue.

I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?

I saw a general message sent to all social media and news media to be aware of Russia influencing

And the Hunters laptop origin story is on par with Monica’s giz stained dress she happened to keep for over a year with Linda Tripp advice

Hunters laptop was clearly Planted to discredit Biden since that failed now they blame the FBI

Hell you have

Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people..

It’s all theater for the republican party
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?

I saw a general message sent to all social media and news media to be aware of Russia influencing

And the Hunters laptop origin story is on par with Monica’s giz stained dress she happened to keep for over a year with Linda Tripp advice

Hunters laptop was clearly Planted to discredit Biden since that failed now they blame the FBI

Hell you have

Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people..

It’s all theater for the republican party
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I still haven’t seen anything to suggest the FBI was trying to help Biden to hide anything ?"

Come on Wayne. Mark Zuckerberg stated the FBI told them to watch out for Russian disinformation regarding Hunter, just before the laptop story broke. At that time, the FBI had the laptop, so they obviously knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

"Jim Jordan claiming on the floor of the house that the Biden administration has Weaponized the government against the American people.."

The FBI misled a FISA court to get surveillance on Carter Page. The FBI went to Facebook and told them to be alert for bogus stories regarding Hunter (and as far as I know, the only thing Facebook censored regarding Hunter was the laptop, which we now know was legit). When the FBI arrested Roget Stone, they did so with a fully armed tactical team, after alerting CNN so they could be there to cover it. We all saw the emails between Trump-hating FBI agents Strzok and his mistress.


It's not the whole DOJ. But there's some politically motivated stuff happening there.

If you don't see it, it's because you don't want to see it, because it doesn't serve your narrative.

Do you know what's on the laptop? You seem convinced already it's a nothingburger.

"It’s all theater for the republican party"

As was the Russia hoax investigation.

Elections have consequences. It's the GOPs turn now. Is the GOP supposed to let the dems engage in political theater, and not do the same when it's their turn? What's good for the goose, right? Or is there some reason why only the Democrats get to engage in political witch hunts?

[wdmso]

Democrats get to engage in political witch hunts?

How do you get convictions with witchhunts?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Jim is so oblivious to the current or what will be the eventual criminal head count his party ends up owning and if you are old enough to remember the score of the Pats/Bears Super Bowl, that will be close to the blue vs red criminal convictions delta if the current gop lead congress decides to go on a revenge campaign instead of governing for all Americans.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Come on Wayne. Mark Zuckerberg stated the FBI told them to watch out for Russian disinformation regarding Hunter, just before the laptop story broke.

Prove it. I’ll wait.

[wdmso]

When the FBI arrested Roget Stone, they did so with a fully armed tactical team, after alerting CNN so they could be there to cover it.

I’d this the same source tell you what’s on Hunters laptop

More conspiracy Jim really.

Stone has repeatedly criticized the dramatic arrest at his home in January, which was caught on film by a CNN camera crew staking out his South Florida house. Stone claims CNN was tipped off about the arrest to film the raid,

Yep Stones credible lol
Of course more rumors and innuendo masquerading as facts

Law enforcement agencies often conduct early-morning arrests or raids with large numbers of officers and tactical equipment.

With stone they should include a bag over his head

they were armed Mar-a-Lago raid, also

Not sure why Republicans are against police or the FBI conducting raids via protocol as they would against other Americans?

So we should treat seditious scum with white gloves?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Twitter Files 11: Hillary's Russia 'Cues' at Core of Intel Meddling

Now Hillary ? Musk feeding the right wing deep state narrative shocking


In depth reporting only allowed on twitter with a 280 character limit


And the right wing is spewing these conclusions

Ultimately, U.S. government influence at Twitter would work to derail Trump's administration, spur a widespread censorship campaign by U.S. government agencies during the 2020 presidential election and pandemic, and perhaps even light the fire for Russia's invasion of Ukraine,

Wow.amazing how republicans love to hate America when they lose elections and why they seek political power via lies or force


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

I find. It odd Republicans are all over Tik Tok which have all the security flaws of Twitter and content yet

GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin told NBC’s “Meet The Press TikTok is an addictive drug China’s government is providing to Americans, says the incoming chairman of a new House select committee on China.

As GOPers ban TikTok, they’re not keeping that same energy with Twitter
There seems to be an obvious reason Republicans are banning TikTok from government devices but not Twitter, which carries many of the same security risks.

What isn’t clear, though, is how these security issues are materially different from issues on social platforms Republicans tend to love these days — like Twitter and Facebook.

Both of those platforms, for example, have well-documented histories of being used by foreign governments to manipulate and demoralize Americans. Whistleblowers from both companies have come forward with damning claims. If the GOP were concerned about influence from foreign governments, you’d think more of them would decry the fact that the Saudis have openly touted their investment in Elon Musk’s Twitter.



The FBI is concerned that the Chinese government could use TikTok to influence American users or control their devices.


So let me get this straight the GOP trust the FBIs views on TikTok

Yet the FBI is in bed with Twitter

As I’ve said The Twitter-FBI story relies far more on insinuation than evidence

[wdmso]

https://www.techdirt.com/2022/12/20/...ter-to-censor/

Some reading outside people’s bubble

But, since at least some of us still believe in facts and truth, let’s walk through this.
First up, we already did a huge, long debunker on the idea that the FBI (or any government entity) was in any way involved in the Twitter decision to block links to the Hunter Biden laptop story. Most of the people who believed that have either ignored that there was no evidence to support it, or have simply moved on to this new lie, suggesting that “the FBI” was “sending lists” to Twitter of people to censor.
The problem is that, once again, that’s not what “the Twitter Files” show, even as the reporters working on it — Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger — either don’t understand what they’re looking at or are deliberately misrepresenting it. I’m no fan of the FBI, and have spent much of the two and a half decades here at Techdirt criticizing it. But… there’s literally no scandal here (or if there is one, it’s something entirely different, which we’ll get to at the end of the article).
What the files show is that the FBI would occasionally (not very often, frankly) use reporting tools to alert Twitter to accounts that potentially violated Twitter’s rules. When the FBI did so, it was pretty clear that it was just flagging these accounts for Twitter to review, and had no expectation that the company would or would not do anything about it. In fact, they are explicit in their email that the accounts “may potentially constitute violations of Twitter’s Terms of Service” and that Twitter can take “any action or inaction deemed appropriate within Twitter policy.”

you can see that if they can get a 2703(d) order (again, signed by a judge) they can seek to obtain subscriber info, transaction records, retrieved communications, and unretrieved communications stored for more than 180 days (in the past, we’ve long complained about the whole 180 days thing, but that’s another issue).
You know what’s not on that list? “Censoring people.” It’s just not a thing.

It’s got nothing at all to do with “censorship demands.” And yet Musk and friends are going hog wild pushing this utter nonsense.




Notice the attached chart the FBI was seeking data request from Twitter since 2016. So Trumps FBI was doing the same thing ?

But it’s the liberals weaponizing the Government against the American people with this imaginary censorship regime and of course don’t for get the goose stepping IRS agents come to audit and steal your hard earned Money

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So let me get this straight the GOP trust the FBIs views on TikTok

Yet the FBI is in bed with Twitter

As I’ve said The Twitter-FBI story relies far more on insinuation than evidence

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?

Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?

Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

Russia Russia Russia

Funny how it keeps turning up

A former aide to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was convicted Thursday after being found guilty of helping funnel illegal foreign campaign contributions from a Russian national into former President Trump's 2016 campaign.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Russia Russia Russia

Funny how it keeps turning up


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So we aren't supposed to mention a huge, empty, politically-motivated investigation that your side started. But if the GOP plans to do the same thing with Hunter, THAT needs to be discussed. But we can't discuss why it's OK when the left does the same thing.

Please explain why it's always OK when the left does it, but never OK when the right does it?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Prove it. I’ll wait.

Zuckerberg said it. Was he lying to help Republicans? Is that what you're saying? I'm truly sorry if you don't happen to like it, but the CEO of Facebook who is a die hard liberal, claimed that's what happened.

"Because I don't like it", isn't an acceptable reason to deny what Zuckerberg said.

Spence, the FBI had possession of the laptop. They knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Zuckerberg said it. Was he lying to help Republicans? Is that what you're saying? I'm truly sorry if you don't happen to like it, but the CEO of Facebook who is a die hard liberal, claimed that's what happened.

"Because I don't like it", isn't an acceptable reason to deny what Zuckerberg said.

Spence, the FBI had possession of the laptop. They knew it wasn't Russian disinformation.

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

I've said many times that Zuckerberg never claimed the FBI specifically warned them about the laptop. But Zuckerberg did say they were specifically warned about Russian disinformation concerning Hunter Biden.

Bryan, the FBI had the laptop in their possession, there was absolutely no reason for anyone to speculate that it was Russian disinformation. But with exactly zero evidence, that's how the left spun it.

Look, it's not a big story, America had an election and the voters obviously didn't care. But let's be honest about what happened. Part of being honest about what happened is admitting the FBI never specified the laptop.

And part of being honest is admitting that MANY of the outlets that banned the story, now (now that it can't hurt Biden) say it was wrong to ban it, because it was legit. two years later they're conceding that.

It's not illegal for a private company to have a political bias. If Foxnews can be biased, so can Facebook. But that doesn't mean we can't be honest about it.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

wayne, no one on the right said that the FBI can never be trusted. Why is everything one extreme or the other?


Jim the right is screaming the FBI can never be trusted ever unless they but a democratic in jail


Two things can be true at the same time. Some in the FBI could have very inappropriately tried to cleanse social media of things unfavorable to Biden. [COLOR="red"]Only in the imaginary world of the far right no individual has that power[/COLOR] At the same time, the FBI might be right about Tik Tok and China.

In your mind, life is as simple as “the republican is always wrong.”. Most of us realize the world isn’t that simple.

No Jim in my experience and their actual behavior their always lying and misrepresentation facts ignoring truth. The last 5 year is filled with examples

All these so called upcoming investigations are not for truth and transparency No different than a Benghazi hearings even McCarthys let the cat out the bag on that one .

all they’re gonna do is talk to discredit Biden and anyone around him prior to the 2024 election it’s so obvious all the Republicans can’t see it


Jiim this is the narrative of the house GOP suggesting to the American people (actually just their base )

That Ultimately, U.S. government influence at Twitter would work to derail Trump's administration, spur a widespread censorship campaign by U.S. government agencies during the 2020 presidential election and pandemic, and perhaps even light the fire for Russia's invasion of Ukraine,

That last comment is amazing A. Republicans claim a migrant invasion is Biden’s Fault. And Now Twitter and Biden are some how responsible for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine !

But it’s really not surprising how Republicans are pulling back from Ukraine using their go to excuse of fiscally responsibility bla bla bla

Because once again their base sees Putin as a Savior and hero fighting Traditional western values. Which is code for no people of color gays transgender. Or liberals

2014 Buchanan blushed with praise for Putin’s policies, writing, “In the culture war for the future of mankind, Putin is planting Russia’s flag firmly on the side of traditional Christianity.”


2022 A growing number of white nationalists identify with Vladimir Putin

The U.S. Christians Who Pray for Putin

So this new house leadership or lack of it might seem comical today
It’s more dangerous than it looks

[RIROCKHOUND]

Or, since the FBI did not warn about the ‘Laptop’ they were warning more generally about Russian disinformation. Both things (that there was a laptop in the FBI possession AND that there was a likely chance of Russian disinformation possibly coming) can be true.

If in any other time, Rudy (in his present form) came out and said this legally blind computer repair guy (who has turned into a crackpot in his own right from what I have seen when he has been interviewed) has a laptop he claims is Hunter Biden’s in the weeks leading up to an election. What reasonable person wouldn’t have serious misgivings about the origin of the story? At the time I didnt know if I believed Russia, but it was certainly reasonable to think it was a plant. That has been proven wrong, and it clearly was Hunters, however many of the documents out there (including emails) have missing or altered metadata which makes it damn hard to believe anything on there that is out in the Twitterverse.


You are right though, the FBI (Under Barr, who up until the end was a ball washing Trump loyalist) had the laptop and did nothing. So either, A., Deep State wanted Trump out OR B., there is a lot of #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up personal stuff about Hunter on there, but nothing criminal/Biden corruption. Which do you think it is?

My vote is B. Hunter is a dirtbag and there is a lot of personal stuff on there, but had there been any ‘there, there’ we would have heard about it before the DOJ changed out of Trump’s control.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Or, since the FBI did not warn about the ‘Laptop’ they were warning more generally about Russian disinformation. Both things (that there was a laptop in the FBI possession AND that there was a likely chance of Russian disinformation possibly coming) can be true.

If in any other time, Rudy (in his present form) came out and said this legally blind computer repair guy (who has turned into a crackpot in his own right from what I have seen when he has been interviewed) has a laptop he claims is Hunter Biden’s in the weeks leading up to an election. What reasonable person wouldn’t have serious misgivings about the origin of the story? At the time I didnt know if I believed Russia, but it was certainly reasonable to think it was a plant. That has been proven wrong, and it clearly was Hunters, however many of the documents out there (including emails) have missing or altered metadata which makes it damn hard to believe anything on there that is out in the Twitterverse.


You are right though, the FBI (Under Barr, who up until the end was a ball washing Trump loyalist) had the laptop and did nothing. So either, A., Deep State wanted Trump out OR B., there is a lot of #^&#^&#^&#^&ed up personal stuff about Hunter on there, but nothing criminal/Biden corruption. Which do you think it is?

My vote is B. Hunter is a dirtbag and there is a lot of personal stuff on there, but had there been any ‘there, there’ we would have heard about it before the DOJ changed out of Trump’s control.

you also left out, somewhat conveniently, that zuckerberg admits it was wrong to ban it.

i agree on reflexive doubts on the laptop. But the NY Post reported in it, and sourced it. They weren’t just taking anyone’s word for it. Their twitter account was banned for posting a story that was accurate. and again that’s not illegal, but we should admit what happened.

nobody had to take rudy’s ( and i agree his current form is a pathetic shell of his 9/11 days) word for it. But There was zero evidence that the NY Posts reporting was bogus. But your side didn’t like it, so they all claimed it as russian disinformation.

Bryan they reported accurately, and were accused of spreading russian disinformation. If you’re going to a accuse someone of that, shouldn’t you have some speck of proof?

I am truly glad you come out here sometimes. You and Paul are the only ones left of center cap or of discussing things with.

And i don’t know which it is, which is why i hope the hearings reveal which it is.

I’m suspicious of Buntwrs success in ukraine, of all places, and at all times. Had to be the one country that daddy was our point man on. that’s either a huge coincidence, or not a coincidence. which do you think it is?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you also left out, somewhat conveniently, that zuckerberg admits it was wrong to ban it.

i agree on reflexive doubts on the laptop. But the NY Post reported in it, and sourced it. They weren’t just taking anyone’s word for it. Their twitter account was banned for posting a story that was accurate. and again that’s not illegal, but we should admit what happened.

nobody had to take rudy’s ( and i agree his current form is a pathetic shell of his 9/11 days) word for it. But There was zero evidence that the NY Posts reporting was bogus. But your side didn’t like it, so they all claimed it as russian disinformation.

Bryan they reported accurately, and were accused of spreading russian disinformation. If you’re going to a accuse someone of that, shouldn’t you have some speck of proof?

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

but it’s not just that they banned it when they shouldn’t have. they accused those who wanted to discuss it, if knowingly spreading russian disinformation. They made that accusation knowing there was no basis for it. Not one of them has been asked to defend that.

what was your question?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Yup.
They got it wrong (I did say it was proven false above).
The difference is, I see it (and read the Taibbi stuff with a huge grin of salt) as uncertainty of the source and 'CYA' not some grand plan to oust Trump. But we all have our biases on how we see it.

(You missed my question about the laptop and the FBI....)

and you’re right about biases. but geez, how many of these mistakes benefit the right, and how many benefit the left? isn’t there a pattern there? Ferguson MO, Freddy Gray, Duke lacrosse case, Nick Sandman, Rittenhouse, the rolling stone fake rape accusation…

What was the FBIs evidence that there was actual
russian disinformation regarding hunter? did big tech ban any stories that actually were russian disinformation? or did they only ban the laptop story? those are sincere questions.

[wdmso]

Interesting read

https://www.theshortcut.com/p/twitter-files

[wdmso]

Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story And this magical suppression

No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post or any other Print or online media outlets

It ran all over the Internet and print news through the entire world..

They only reason I can conclude it fits the rights narrative of not liking big technology, because big tec doesn’t give them money like they give Democratic’s they’re the same with Unions they hate them for the same reason

Many rightfully question the source of the material due to the chain of custody and Rudy Giuliani clearly not a trustworthy source

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story And this magical suppression

No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post or any other Print or online media outlets

It ran all over the Internet and print news through the entire world..

They only reason I can conclude it fits the rights narrative of not liking big technology, because big tec doesn’t give them money like they give Democratic’s they’re the same with Unions they hate them for the same reason

Many rightfully question the source of the material due to the chain of custody and Rudy Giuliani clearly not a trustworthy source

"Still not sure why Jim in the right are so fixated on Twitter the Hunter Biden laptop story"

Because you can't comprehend why anyone would be interested in a story that doesn't help democrats.

"No one can Explain why the FBI would only look to censor Twitter and FB but not the New York post "

Huh? How would the FBI convince the NY Post to censor their own story, which they knew to be factual? Do you not understand what took place? The NY Post knew it was a legit story at the time they reported on it. Why would they censor themselves?

"No one" can explain that to you? Probably because no one considered the possibility that something that obvious would need to be explained.

The circulation of the NY post is nothing compared to how many people are on FB and Twitter and Instagram.

Wayne, you guys go on and on about Foxnews. On a good night, 1% of the country is watching Foxnews. One percent. That's nothing compared to who controls big tech. And it's fine if Big tech wants to have a political slant, it's a free country. But let's not deny it just because it makes your life easier.

I don't think you understand what happened. They called a legit story "russian disinformation", and they did so with absolutely zero evidence. They banned it when it might have hurt Biden, then they all admitted they had no legit reason to ban it.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you guys go on and on about Foxnews. On a good night 1% of the country is watching Foxnews. One percent. That's nothing compared to who controls big tech. And it's fine if Big tech wants to have a political slant, it's a free country. But let's not deny it just because it makes your life easier.

I don't think you understand what happened. They called a legit story "russian disinformation", and they did so with absolutely zero evidence.

There’s plenty of evidence

As far as your number two hit of Faux News having only a small share of the market

CNN, Fox News Top List of Main Sources

Overall, when respondents are asked what outlet they turn to most often for news about government and politics, the most frequent mentions are two cable networks: CNN (named by 16%) and Fox News (14%). But wide ideological differences exist both in the sources that top the list for those on the left and right and in the degree to which there is reliance on a single source.

Those with consistently conservative political values are oriented around a single outlet—Fox News—to a much greater degree than those in any other ideological group: Nearly half (47%) of those who are consistently conservative name Fox News as their main source for government and political news. Far fewer choose any other single source: Local radio ranks second, named by 11%, with no other individual source named by more than 5% of consistent conservatives. Those with mostly conservative views also gravitate strongly toward Fox News – 31% name it as their main source, several times the share who name the next most popular sources, including CNN (9%), local television (6%) and radio (6%) and Yahoo News (6%).

On the left of the political spectrum, no single outlet predominates. Among consistent liberals, CNN (15%), NPR (13%), MSNBC (12%) and the New York Times (10%) all rank near the top of the list. CNN is named by just 20% of those with mostly liberal views, but still tops their list, followed by local television (11%) and NPR (9%). Both MSNBC and Fox News are mentioned by 5% of those who are mostly liberal. Those in other ideological groups name the New York Times, NPR and MSNBC less frequently as top news sources.

Respondents with a roughly equal mix of liberal and conservative values also have a diffuse mix of news providers. CNN (20%) and local television (16%) are the most frequently-named top sources, with a long list of other news sources named by fewer than one-in-ten. Fox News (8%) is among the most-named sources in this “long tail,” along with Yahoo News (7%) and Google News (6%), both of which primarily aggregate and highlight news produced by other outlets.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

There’s plenty of evidence

As far as your number two hit of Faux News having only a small share of the market

CNN, Fox News Top List of Main Sources

Overall, when respondents are asked what outlet they turn to most often for news about government and politics, the most frequent mentions are two cable networks: CNN (named by 16%) and Fox News (14%). But wide ideological differences exist both in the sources that top the list for those on the left and right and in the degree to which there is reliance on a single source.

Those with consistently conservative political values are oriented around a single outlet—Fox News—to a much greater degree than those in any other ideological group: Nearly half (47%) of those who are consistently conservative name Fox News as their main source for government and political news. Far fewer choose any other single source: Local radio ranks second, named by 11%, with no other individual source named by more than 5% of consistent conservatives. Those with mostly conservative views also gravitate strongly toward Fox News – 31% name it as their main source, several times the share who name the next most popular sources, including CNN (9%), local television (6%) and radio (6%) and Yahoo News (6%).

On the left of the political spectrum, no single outlet predominates. Among consistent liberals, CNN (15%), NPR (13%), MSNBC (12%) and the New York Times (10%) all rank near the top of the list. CNN is named by just 20% of those with mostly liberal views, but still tops their list, followed by local television (11%) and NPR (9%). Both MSNBC and Fox News are mentioned by 5% of those who are mostly liberal. Those in other ideological groups name the New York Times, NPR and MSNBC less frequently as top news sources.

Respondents with a roughly equal mix of liberal and conservative values also have a diffuse mix of news providers. CNN (20%) and local television (16%) are the most frequently-named top sources, with a long list of other news sources named by fewer than one-in-ten. Fox News (8%) is among the most-named sources in this “long tail,” along with Yahoo News (7%) and Google News (6%), both of which primarily aggregate and highlight news produced by other outlets.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if there is “plenty” of evidence it was russian disinformation, why is everyone now denying that claim?

my numbers were right. a good show for fox gets 3m viewers, which is 1% of the US population.

Numbers on FB, twitter, and instagram, dwarf that.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

if there is “plenty” of evidence it was russian disinformation, why is everyone now denying that claim?

my numbers were right. a good show for fox gets 3m viewers, which is 1% of the US population.

Numbers on FB, twitter, and instagram, dwarf that.

People - including you as the very worst perpetrator of misinformation - very rarely say false facts. Instead, they say true things without enough context. But nobody will ever agree what context is necessary and which context is redundant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

People - including you as the very worst perpetrator of misinformation - very rarely say false facts. Instead, they say true things without enough context. But nobody will ever agree what context is necessary and which context is redundant.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

foxnews can’t influence those who don’t watch. Is that true or is it false?

1% of the country watches foxnews. according to pew research, 70% of americans use big social media.

the reason why fox has a big market share among conservatives, is a lack of competition. every other tv station is liberal, so all the rest are splitting the liberal viewership. that doesn’t mean that more than 1% watch fox at any one time.

context is indeed important. nothing i said was misleading. it’s way way more powerful to control big social media than foxnews. o comparison. not even close.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet.../social-media/

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

foxnews can’t influence those who don’t watch. Is that true or is it false?

1% of the country watches foxnews. according to pew research, 70% of americans use big social media.

the reason why fox has a big market share among conservatives, is a lack of competition. every other tv station is liberal, so all the rest are splitting the liberal viewership. that doesn’t mean that more than 1% watch fox at any one time.

context is indeed important. nothing i said was misleading. it’s way way more powerful to control big social media than foxnews. o comparison. not even close.

https://www.pewresearch.org/internet.../social-media/

Maybe you should pay more attention to American news, instead of Russian
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

From BBC. Bold is my emphasis.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."
He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

The "pattern" was crafted by the FBI and fed to the news agencies.

From Twitter Files release #7 by Michael Schellenbeger:

Yoel Roth (Twitter’s former head of trust and safety) admitted in a sworn declaration that the feds had primed him to view any reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop as a “Russian ‘hack and leak’ operation.

The FBI via it's special agent Elvis Chan shared information with Twitter's Roth relating to the Russian hacking organization, APT28, through the FBI's secure, one-way communications channel, Teleporter.

Yoel Roth told @karaswisher that he had been primed to think about the Russian hacking group APT28 before news of the Hunter Biden laptop came out.

In Sept 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden

The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it

The organizer was Vivian Schiller, the fmr CEO of NPR, fmr head of news at Twitter; fmr Gen. mgr of NY Times; fmr Chief Digital Officer of NBC News

By mid-Sept, 2020, Chan (FBI) & Roth had set up an encrypted messaging network so employees from FBI & Twitter could communicate.

They also agreed to create a “virtual war room” for “all the [Internet] industry plus FBI and ODNI” [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].

Then, on Sept 15, 2020 the FBI’s Laura Dehmlow, who heads up the Foreign Influence Task Force, and Elvis Chan, request to give a classified briefing for Jim Baker (the disgraced former FBI agent who was now working for Twitter [well wasn't that just ducky?] and was eventually tasked with choosing what files would be released to the journalists that Musk allowed to report on the files and was then fired by Musk because he only released files that would not show negative FBI influence), without any other Twitter staff, such as Yoel Roth, present.

When Roth repeatedly didn't see any actual violation of Twitter policy in the Hunter story, Baker repeatedly insists that the Hunter Biden materials were either faked, hacked, or both, and a violation of Twitter policy. Baker does so over email, and in a Google doc, on October 14 and 15. (Shellenberger says "And yet it's inconceivable Baker believed the Hunter Biden emails were either fake or hacked. The @nypost had included a picture of the receipt signed by Hunter Biden, and an FBI subpoena showed that the agency had taken possession of the laptop in December 2019.

The FBI, as are all intelligence agencies, is well tasked in cloaking what it does illegally in bureaucratic ways that make it appear legit. It didn't "order" or directly tell Twitter and other news orgs. and social media to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story. It primed them well to perceive the story as "potential" or actual Russian disinformation. It knew the story was about to be released, and timed its misinformation campaign to "debunk" the story before the election.

And, BTW, since it was in such direct communication with Twitter and all the rest of the news and social media orgs. and certainly knew that it's direct efforts to "warn" them about Russian hacking and disinformation which was about to happen shortly would very likely influence them to bury the Hunter laptop story and have an effect on the election, it should have, in the interests of not influencing the election, told them that the laptop story was, as they knew, not Russian disinformation.