Forums / Discussion / General

So… Basically those pushing an ideological agenda are using corporate corruption to spread their influence?
I remember when certain extremely conservative or fringe spiritual movements tried to do the same and it was taken quite negatively.
Makes me wonder why there is no pushback now.
I guess I'm glad I saw this coming and moved on to create my own IPs instead of mourning the loss of the works I loved.

Both Garde and I explained how it connects. And if there is someone who stays focused on following, and enforcing, the on topic rule, that is Garde.
I know because that's one of the things my memory associates with that user picture and name.

Look, I like dunking on libs, but Project Veritas simply cannot be trusted

To everyone saying Vetitas can't be trusted:

I'm gonna need those facts. So far I have 341+ pieces of proof that says they are to be trusted

Vs 4 pieces of their own admission when they didn't get things right

The stories told about Veritas parallel those about #Gamergate. Based on hersay and opinion rather than fact. And when those facts come to light after the publication, however, those stories get redacted but not put on blast. Therefore, a soured opinion that Veritas can't be trusted permiates from the inital stories, creating this infamous reputation.

The easiest hint was to take those stories and rumors and play some substitution. Switching mentions of Project Veritas with #Gamergate. They read pretty much the same; accusations of being alt or far right. Accusations of Veritas using under handed tactics to expose those that should claim what they were saying was the truth, without evidence to prove the contrary to what Veritas presented, nor a breakdown as to why what Veritas presented was false via means of evidence. Only the opinion that Veritas is Can't be trusted based on whats been repeated but not proven is textbook "Listen and Believe"

I offer a counter, "Trust but Verify" and I see no Verification thus far from Veritas's Naysayers. Contrary, I see lots of verification proving these naysayings as false.

TL;DR:
Veritas's Story parallels #Gamergate's in the newsroom
Veritas can't be trusted, so far = Listen and believe
Veritas may not be trustworthy, but they can Verify their stories.

Therefore, if Veritas presents a story, I'm inclined to believe as they provide concrete evidence: usually recordings of interviews that are reported on the subject matter at hand. The naysayings usually object to how the information was obtained, rather than if the contents of the information are false.

How does this relate to #gamergate:

Ethics in Journalism as a whole.
Listen and Believe vs Trust but Verify.

Brian Michael Goss from Journalism Studies, Noprthwestern University Press, PRWeek, Snopes… they all say it's a far-right activist group whose job is to peddle BS. I checked them all back to back. Every single last source with a shred of integrity says the same. Hell, they had a PR campaign to get Trump reelected and they pushed the lie about the 2020 election repeatedly to get him back into the Oval Office.

locked for straying too far off the topic of GG for too long, if you want to discuss GG make another thread, but make sure to keep it exclusively relevant to GG