Here's how it looks at Rolling Stone:
Here's the article — "Far-Right Superstars Are Failing on Rumble. Who’s Winning? The outsider streaming site that just partnered up with Donald Trump Jr. is growing — but not in the way most people think."
Russell Brand, the British comic who launched an exclusive show with Rumble after YouTube removed one of his posts for Covid-19 misinformation, also courts viewers with guests who “expose” the supposed lies of “mainstream archaeologists” and topics such as “Prince Harry Saga – The TRUTH About The Deep State?” He’s creeping up on a million subscribers and regularly breaks the 100,000 views threshold, which is great by Rumble standards but a fraction of his YouTube traffic....
If we get far enough into the article, we see Brand relieved of the "far-right" characterization:
Russell Brand, a left-libertarian type, never stops telling his fans that shadowy forces are attempting to deceive and cheat them.
As for Greenwald, there's nothing about him until the middle of the long article:
Then there’s Glenn Greenwald, who fits into precisely none of the aforementioned categories. The Brazil-based investigative journalist resigned from The Intercept, the left-wing news site he co-founded, in 2020, accusing editors of trying to censor a column he wrote just before the election pertaining to materials retrieved from a laptop that had belonged to Joe Biden’s son Hunter.....
[Greenwald] regards Rumble as a crucial haven for free expression, in light of “expanding” censorship across the internet. In 2021, he and former U.S. congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard both took year-long contracts with the site in the “midrange six figures,” per The Washington Post. “It’s more that there are a lot of people being censored, and so I want to support those platforms that are willing to give space to those people,” he says.
To that end, Greenwald in December relaunched his System Update web series as a live, hour-long weeknight program airing exclusively on Rumble, which represents a sizable investment. Apart from paying his new and “considerably higher” salary, Greenwald says — in the seven-figure range, or approximately “what prime-time cable hosts get” — the company has 15 employees working in his Rio de Janeiro studio, and seven more on the editorial side....
Ah! I understand the headline now "Far-Right Superstars Are Failing," but others are winning, notably Glenn Greenwald.
[Greenwald] will use Rumble’s acquired subscription service, Locals, to share his written journalism (and for post-show Q&As). His sudden departure from Substack is a major shakeup for the service....
Greenwald admits that he’d “like to see a little bit more done” to attract the “roster of diverse voices” that the company claims to be seeking. “I know that they’re negotiating with some pretty big, very well-recognized left-wing voices,” he says. They’re trying to build a “network of scheduled, one-hour live shows, similar to the way a cable channel would function,” he explains, and will of course, he adds, go after talent that curbs the “pigeon-holing” of the site as a hotbed of right-wing rhetoric.
So, there's an effort to shake the right-wing label, and Rolling Stone isn't keen on helping them with that, but the information is there. In fact, once you get to the middle, you may suspect that it's really an article about Greenwald that got rearranged not to look like that.
There are signs, however, that conspiracist extremism will keep flourishing on the platform....
Greenwald says he’s not bothered by sitting in Rumble’s top videos alongside election deniers, anti-vaxxers or QAnon types, nor does he feel it reflects badly on his own channel. “To me, that’s guilt by association,” he says. “You’re on Twitter, you’re on a platform with Donald Trump Jr. and people who are pushing all sorts of things.”
He flips the question around to remark that misinformation and disinformation, though present on Rumble, are perpetuated in mainstream media, too. “It wasn’t Andrew Tate that helped the country get lied into the Iraq War. It was the The New York Times, The New Yorker and The Atlantic,” he says....
पोस्ट्स
६२ टिप्पण्या:
The MSM here and abroad have taken to calling all conservatives "far right". We listen to the French news and that's standard issue these days.
Anyone who uses the term "far right" is only using it to impugn. They likely can't define it, nor can they articulate how it differs from merely right, let alone, center. Left, or far left.
There is a thing that I call "Twitterwashing," basically an article is written so that the summary presents the intended regime narrative, and then you read the article, and the summary often is not actually supported by the facts presented, but not that many people click through.
Russel Brand is kind of brilliant, and has done a lot to change my way of thinking, but Greenwald does a better job of keeping himself relevant to what's happening now, and it helps that @elonmusk interacts with Greenwald from time to time.
There is a thing that I call "Twitterwashing," basically an article is written so that the summary presents the intended regime narrative, and then you read the article, and the summary often is not actually supported by the facts presented, but not that many people click through
…as an Arizona Audit Proves Joe Biden Won. Well, yes there were improper votes that by law should have been thrown out and yes the number of those votes was larger than Biden’s margin of victory…but gosh darnit Joe Biden won..
I guess that makes me one of those far right election deniers.
Misinformation - kind of like Rolling Stone not being forthright with the gist of the article?
Russell Brand makes quips that make me laugh out loud. He does a great job arguing his points.
FleetUSA said...The MSM here and abroad have taken to calling all conservatives "far right".
It’s a truism that “far right” simply means “person this leftist doesn’t like.” It’s an all-purpose smear.
The biggest weakness of leftism is that it can’t do self-criticism. Because anybody engaging it it is no longer left, they’re far right, extreme right, alt-right, whatever. As a practical matter, this is why the left always overplays its hand—there is no limiting principle, nothing to keep it from self-destructing.
I tried to get somebody to define "fascism" as he used it on Twitter, and learned a new word "sealioning," which is apparently the debate crime of asking for definitions or evidence for something that "everybody knows" is true. It's a perfect "thought stopping" phrase, phrases used by cults to keep their members from following lines of thinking that might lead to deviation from accepted thought within the cult.
Rolling Stone publishes false articles about fraternities gang-raping women.
If you actually watched or listened to a tiny fraction of these endlessly long podcasts, you’d never do anything else.
This era of hysterical political obsession has become a damned bore. Been going on for a couple of decades. It’s worn out.
Time to find something else to do.
Well,that's a first. "Rght wing" is the MSM appellation for any broadly-popular position (anti Affirmative Action, pro moderate abortion restrictions) or centrist person, even someone of the left like Tulsi Gabbard. "Hard Right" is reserved for conservative people or beliefs.
This may be the inaugural use of the term "left wing" in a non-aeronautical context. Does the Rolling Stone need to be reported to Biden's Misinformation Board because they are guilty of conducting journalism?
Brand moved his longer pieces to Rumble a couple of months ago because he was tired of getting censored on Youtube. It takes time to build a subscriber base, and, given how many fewer Rumble users there are than on Youtube, 1 million subscribers is actually pretty impressive.
I like some things Brand says, but he does seem to wobble over into conspiracy land fairly often. Rogan does too, but he lets the people he's interviewing speak for themselves and seems a bit more willing to challenge what they say. And pretty often you can tell he's listening to something because he's entertained, not because he believes it.
In either case, of course, the secret is to research and think for yourself and don't rely on others to tell you what the truth is.
The gate-keepers of honesty are not often found in places like Rolling Stone.
"Then there’s Glenn Greenwald, who fits into precisely none of the aforementioned categories."
Why write "these" when "aforementioned" will do?
F Rolling Stone and Jann Wenner.
Greenwald and Brand represent a possible horseshoe in politics (hat tip Mickey Kaus). They both are so far left on most issues that on some issues they will connect with the right.
The Left is moving so far and so fast from the center that the light from the center is red shifted. From their perspective, everyone else is “far right.”
Surprising that Unz Review isn't mentioned. Ron Unz decided to do the same thing in print decades ago -- take all comers. His site attracts anti-Semites and vaccine deniers. But also other people, and he just lets them all rip. He occasionally debates those with whom he disagrees, especially on the topic of vaccines. I find several of the writers entirely repulsive, and some have ties to foreign disinformation and counterintelligence entities, but it's still an interesting exercise, not so much in free speech but in the effects of increasingly limiting platforms elsewhere for anyone whose views violate the ever-expanding list of untouchable speech.
The single most important example of the snowballing effects of speech repression is Joe Rogan. Rogan was the best paid podcaster, with absolute freedom to explore topics and people he chose. Then he sold his show to Spotify, and either he or him in conjunction with Spotify immediately took down his controversial shows and put a big dog leash on future programming. It ruined Rogan's unique creation and drove a permanent wedge between him and his listeners. He didn't need the money: he chose the leash. His shows are dull and clearly restricted to politically correct topics now. In his case, I think he just smoked too much pot and got lazy. He still gets to curse and get high on the air, but that's just a sad spectacle now.
Shouting Thomas said...If you actually watched or listened to a tiny fraction of these endlessly long podcasts, you’d never do anything else.
That's why I don't listen to podcasts, even by people I really like. There's way too much material out there. It's overwhelming. If I dedicated my entire life to listening to podcasts, I would still never hear more than a small fraction of 1% of what I might find interesting. Better to just not bother.
So who then are these "far-right superstars" who are failing? I wonder if I've ever heard of them.
Suppose I could read the article...
If you actually watched or listened to a tiny fraction of these endlessly long podcasts, you’d never do anything else.
I just can't stand how slow they are. Reading is so much faster. Yes, I know you can speed up a podcast, but then they just sound ridiculous. And there's still no way to skim.
Shouting T isn't wrong about how boring the age of constant political outrage has been... even when I share the outrage.
No ironic quotation marks around "misinformation" or "election deniers."
A stooge.
Shouting Thomas--podcasts are great for long drives, working out, or doing projects in the workshop.
Otherwise way too slow a medium for engaging one's brain, and a literal waste of time.
(Of course watching golf tournaments on TV is not a waste of time, despite what my wife tells me).
Forget it, Ann. It's Rolling Stone.
Greenwald is fighting censorship in Brazil now as well, as a judge down there has decreed who can, and cannot appear on social media. What can, and cannot be stated.
The power and influence of the Global Elite runs far and wide.
What Larry J said.
Hard to believe Rolling Stone magazine is now pushing a certain kind of censorship.
Censorship via reputation designation, reputation destruction, a creation of the other people, that must not be heard from.
Alinski RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)
Greenwald and brand are iconoclast
All your far left insanity and lies will not be mentioned in the far left global elite obedience crowd at places like NYT, New Yorker, WaPo, PBS news, Rolling Stoner, Vanity Fair, Joy Behar, and of course the Democrat Party Cable channels like msNBC-Maddow-Hillary.
>>I just can't stand how slow they are. Reading is so much faster.
Aka "I can read faster than I can listen."
Isn’t it reputation destruction to be lumped in with Charlottesville killer?
The Rolling Stone once again reinforces their brand as journalistic trash and imagines people still believe it's the 'Good Old Days'.
Tim Maguire at 5:51 was exactly right. The great problem with Progressivism is that it has no limiting principle. If a little bit is good, a whole lot must be much better; if a lot of something is bad, the least little bit must be expunged. For sensible people, (as Paracelsus may have said) sola dosis facit venenum - the dose makes the poison.
“ If you actually watched or listened to a tiny fraction of these endlessly long podcasts, you’d never do anything else”
You’d get done all those things you while listening to podcasts to keep from getting bored.
I vary between music, audiobooks, and podcasts when I’m doing things like walking, driving, cleaning, or doing routine task.
Podcasts fit a distinct niche of divided attention that doesn’t suit an audiobook.
Rolling Stone should be commended for implying that truthfulness is a characteristic of the right. However, Greenwald is not of the right despite his recent relentless commitment to accuracy in journalism.
We are in an era when honesty and transparency call for villification by the left. Witness also Elon Musk.
Regardless of their political leanings Greenwald and Musk are evidently appalled by the unapologetic descent of the left into the sewer of dishonesty and corruption.
Tim (5:51) wrote: "The biggest weakness of leftism is that it can’t do self-criticism."
Actually, this is just an offshoot of their inability to engage in critical thinking which is, in turn, a function of their ignorance.
Podcasts - “way too slow a medium for engaging one's brain, and a literal waste of time.”
You can speed them up to 2X the speed - I listen to Scott Adams that way. You can speed up YouTube videos also. And you can speed up Netflix offerings to 1.5X. Audio books and Spotify as well. Much easier to listen to/watch.
There is no Right, there is only the Far-Right, and it starts just past Joe Biden on the continuum. These terms are used instrumentally, not for meaning, in the same way that sociopaths use violence to get what they want, not because you deserve it.
You are right about divided attention and podcasts. It's hard to read while you are driving or taking a walk or cooking. But people like to give off the aura of being such readers, disdaining mere listening. Yes, we know. You're smarter and better than the rest of us. Take an intro linguistics course, wouldja? Or listen to some linguistics podcasts.
Shouting Thomas said...This era of hysterical political obsession has become a damned bore. Been going on for a couple of decades. It’s worn out.
Saw a Twitter thread last night where most seemed to agree the obsession and turning politics into snark was John Stewart's "Daily Show". Stewart's and ass, but that show led to the destruction of late night TV and spawned Colbert, and the "let the unvaccinated die" Jimmy Kimmel.
Nice thing about Twitter is somebody clips the best part of a three hour podcast. So much of the political discourse has become cliche. If you know the bias of the source, the headline and first paragraph tell you what propaganda being pushed.
Althouse still has the patience to dissect every paragraph. He dissections are more interesting than the articles themselves.
Rolling Stone was cool when it was about music. Late night TV was better when it was about comedy. Now they all suck.
The media keep breaking into partisan streams, with plenty of name-calling. Mastodon is pedophiles, and Rumble is a place where Greenwald is getting even richer. There's something to be said for Twitter, especially new Twitter as opposed to old. I don't "follow" anyone, but I go to specific threads every day. For free.
Far right now = NORMAL thinking.
"sealioning," which is apparently the debate crime of asking for definitions or evidence for something that "everybody knows" is true.
Funny how "sealioning" has the same name as Operation Sea Lion, the proposed Nazi invasion of Britain (which is such a tired trope that it's forbidden on many alternate history discussion boards)!
Headlines aren't usually written by the writers. They're intended to catch the eye rather than to convey nuances. They're a kind of bridge from how readers already think about the world to what the newspaper or magazine wants them to think about the part of the world the writer is describing.
In this case, "far-right" conveys the idea that the Rumblers are bad hombres and puts readers in the frame of mind that the magazine wants them to have. So does "failing." Odds are that what readers take away from the article is more what the headline writer wrote than what the article actually says.
Everybody in the infotainment world is financed by somebody. Everybody has been co-opted. Everybody has shady connections. Everybody is somebody else's sock puppet. I am reminded of Semafor, the media start-up that accused Elon Musk of taking money from Sam Bankman-Fried (apparently erroneously) only to be embarrassed by the fact that Sam Bankman-Fried was (apparently) one of their own investors.
What are the odds that there is some form of high tech undermining of the Rumble platform going on, that we will all learn about after Rumble mysteriously fails because it is allegedly not popular?
Tina--I agree with you about Rogan. Too bad.
I'm old enough to remember when Rolling stone published exposes of government corruption like the carl bernstein on hughes/nixon, but the kind of reporter that does that now, like michael hastings is dead now,
Does our Blogmistress have tags for "far right" and "right wing", AND for "far left" and "left wing"?
If so, in what proportions are they used?
Anyone with the technical chops to do a search and find out?
tim maguire said...
Shouting Thomas said...If you actually watched or listened to a tiny fraction of these endlessly long podcasts, you’d never do anything else.
That's why I don't listen to podcasts, even by people I really like. There's way too much material out there. It's overwhelming. If I dedicated my entire life to listening to podcasts, I would still never hear more than a small fraction of 1% of what I might find interesting. Better to just not bother.
**************
Then there are the requests that you pony up for a subscription to see or hear every article and video on the 'net.
In a single day of serious browsing, I'm asked to fork over what amounts to a hundred or more dollars a month. Day after day.
If you subscribe, unless you keep a log of where you plunked down your money, those charges will hit your credit card each month in perpetuity. In most cases you have to do a deep search to learn where you can end your subscription.
Screw that.
“Then there are the requests that you pony up for a subscription to see or hear every article and video on the 'net.“
Podcast apps are free for both apple and android users. Subscribing simply means that those podcasters you like are easily available. Kind of like subscribing to a YouTube channel. Yes you can sign up for extra content but you don’t have to.
Consider requests to “pony up money” as another form of advertising. You don’t have to buy any of the products advertised on tv and you don’t have to buy premium content in order to enjoy podcasts.
The Aussie(?) guy who did the YouTube video series, Primitive Technology, several years back had the right idea. Don't say a word, just do a thing that is interesting and let people watch. Adding to it the political opinions of the presenter would lessen the show.
"The MSM here and abroad have taken to calling all conservatives 'far right.'"
Hmmm...and many Republicans and Trumpers--certainly all on this blog--have taken to calling all Democrats "leftists." Hahaha...as if ! (Or, really...if only!) (And, if only those who purport to be leftists--Sanders, AOC, etc.--actually had the courage of their convictions and voted accordginly.)
I don't assume all Republicans are far right, but that segment of them who are have the loudest voices and the greatest public visibility.
The right is libertarian. The far-right is anarchist. The left-right nexus is leftist. A democratic/dictatorial effect. There can be only one.
Podcasts can be listened at x1.2 or even x1.5 speed. Not as fast as Reading but not as slow as you think.
The problem comes when you have someone like althouse, who can be listened to at x1.0, and she's talking to someone like Michael Brendan Dougherty who can't be listened to at less than x1.75 speed.
"I don't assume all Republicans are far right"
Liar.
"I don't assume all Republicans are far right"
Liar.
Totally mainstream, popular politicians and ideas are labeled "far right."
By definition, they are not. If a large majority of Americans support something, it can't be "far-" anything.
Eva Marie said...
“Then there are the requests that you pony up for a subscription to see or hear every article and video on the 'net.“
Podcast apps are free for both apple and android users. Subscribing simply means that those podcasters you like are easily available. Kind of like subscribing to a YouTube channel. Yes you can sign up for extra content but you don’t have to.
Consider requests to “pony up money” as another form of advertising. You don’t have to buy any of the products advertised on tv and you don’t have to buy premium content in order to enjoy podcasts.
*******************
Oh really? Have you tried to read NYT articles as freely as you would like?
No. Paywall.
Ditto sites like Townhall, Daily Caller, Slate, and many more. You have to pay to see "premium" content.
Since when do TV ads tell you to pay up in order to see the rest of the show?
Ditz.
boatbuilder,
"podcasts are great for ... doing projects in the workshop."
Your workshop is orders of magnitude quieter than mine!
n.n.
I see political affiliation as a circle. 11:00-1:00 is the youngster, open borders, anti-cop, pro-drug anarchist Rightists stupidly dominated by crafty hard leftists, the nutcase fringe of truthers from both extremes who occasionally find a real nut.
Older traditional libertarians and social conservatives co-mingle at 9:00. Traditional Democrats are at 3:00. RINOS are at 7-8, and preening "unaffiliated" "independents" mingle at 4-7.
I don't respect the 4-7 people. They conflate hating politicians and Parties with being uncommitted on issues. They're no more rational than the 12:00 types. Issues are all that matter.
I guess I should add that both dominant Parties suck.
There is no "just right-wing" it's always far-right. Always.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा