Post by Egann on Jul 23, 2017 2:44:36 GMT
Yes, I have been trying to make the Obama retrospective thread, but it's been hard and I don't have time like I used to. And Trump trying to force healthcare non-overhauls I don't like almost as much as I don't like Obamacare isn't helping. But in the meantime...this is important.
The only information we have at the moment is from Lauren Southern's own video on the topic. Bias is definitely in play, and I'm not even going to begin to pretend it's not. But at the same time...this is something I have been expecting for some time. and once I explain the reasons why I think you might see the problems in a new light.
For those who don't know, Lauren Southern is an internet reporter with a strong right leaning. She's not particularly high on my list of internet news sources. I'm not a fan of traditional, get on the scene, then ask leading questions reporting and that's her--and the mainstream media's--style. However, yesterday, July 21, she posted this. For what it's worth, I've verified that Patreon says her account was suspended for violating terms of service.
It's that "this is not open for appeal" line which sticks in my craw because that is such a zag from normal business procedure.
So it's now time for my conspiracy theories. Remember that strategy conference from DNC after Trump was elected? The "$250 million donations to approved questionable charities" club? The one where they discussed how to torpedo Trump? What were they talking about? The strategy to take Trump apart--which seems to mostly be trying to get the Russia Nothingburger to stick via Quantum Tunneling--and what went wrong that they lost an election which--in their words--they should have won. Let's discuss the latter.
To my eye, they probably concluded they lost control of the narrative when Wikileaks posted the Podesta emails. The Veritas videos released right around the election suggest huge collusion between the DNC and the larger media outlets. This makes sense; controlling the news reported is the oldest way of controlling thought. That's the entire idea of Russia's Pravda state run media.
But they failed at damage control once the leaks occurred because internet sources--like Lauren Southern--reported heavily on it and the news got out, anyway.
Since then, the DNC donor club has been trying to find ways to strangle internet media by kicking it where it hurts; the wallet. Youtube has been demonetizing videos for non-advertiser friendly content for some time, but this became a major issue--"adpocalypse"--after Trump's election. But content creators got wise and switched to patreon en masse. Even non-political youtubers now get as much of their income as possible from crowdfunding because it's more reliable than Youtube monetization. And so here we are; the first creator kicked off Patreon. Coincidence her reporting style is more or less a copy of the professional reporters? I think not. The most likely explanation is that one of these DNC supercharities threatened Patreon with a significant lawsuit if they didn't close her account. Under pressure, Patreon management folded and closed the account, then added the "no appeals" clause to prevent further inquiry. Because if you looked further, you'd discover the coercion and not a valid closure.
This is precisely how I feel:
The only information we have at the moment is from Lauren Southern's own video on the topic. Bias is definitely in play, and I'm not even going to begin to pretend it's not. But at the same time...this is something I have been expecting for some time. and once I explain the reasons why I think you might see the problems in a new light.
For those who don't know, Lauren Southern is an internet reporter with a strong right leaning. She's not particularly high on my list of internet news sources. I'm not a fan of traditional, get on the scene, then ask leading questions reporting and that's her--and the mainstream media's--style. However, yesterday, July 21, she posted this. For what it's worth, I've verified that Patreon says her account was suspended for violating terms of service.
It's that "this is not open for appeal" line which sticks in my craw because that is such a zag from normal business procedure.
So it's now time for my conspiracy theories. Remember that strategy conference from DNC after Trump was elected? The "$250 million donations to approved questionable charities" club? The one where they discussed how to torpedo Trump? What were they talking about? The strategy to take Trump apart--which seems to mostly be trying to get the Russia Nothingburger to stick via Quantum Tunneling--and what went wrong that they lost an election which--in their words--they should have won. Let's discuss the latter.
To my eye, they probably concluded they lost control of the narrative when Wikileaks posted the Podesta emails. The Veritas videos released right around the election suggest huge collusion between the DNC and the larger media outlets. This makes sense; controlling the news reported is the oldest way of controlling thought. That's the entire idea of Russia's Pravda state run media.
But they failed at damage control once the leaks occurred because internet sources--like Lauren Southern--reported heavily on it and the news got out, anyway.
Since then, the DNC donor club has been trying to find ways to strangle internet media by kicking it where it hurts; the wallet. Youtube has been demonetizing videos for non-advertiser friendly content for some time, but this became a major issue--"adpocalypse"--after Trump's election. But content creators got wise and switched to patreon en masse. Even non-political youtubers now get as much of their income as possible from crowdfunding because it's more reliable than Youtube monetization. And so here we are; the first creator kicked off Patreon. Coincidence her reporting style is more or less a copy of the professional reporters? I think not. The most likely explanation is that one of these DNC supercharities threatened Patreon with a significant lawsuit if they didn't close her account. Under pressure, Patreon management folded and closed the account, then added the "no appeals" clause to prevent further inquiry. Because if you looked further, you'd discover the coercion and not a valid closure.
This is precisely how I feel: