Any fact check or misinformation essay which fails to highlight that H. Biden’s laptop was his, not disinfo, becomes part of the untrustworthy media. This lie, used to censor the truth, means the 2020 election was unfair. Unfair, rigged, stolen. The loser in a close but unfair election, or game, can honestly claim it was stolen.
The desire to avoid discussing this elite lie is similar to avoidance of the Obama spy lie as part of the Collusion hoax, with the FBI acting on false info provided by HR Clinton.
Some truth can be used to obfuscate the inconvenient truth the elites want to avoid, allowing the elites to rationalize their own lies while complaining about untruths others believe.
There’s always a market for those elite rationalizations.
This might be a controversial view (from a onetime minor name in the disinfo field) but I suspect that fact-checking usually misses the mark. QAnon is an example. Those 'thick' stories being about wider intuitions, facts don't matter. The same applies to vaccine hysteria and stolen elections. But where the continued attachment to fact-checking troubles me is in how it speaks of controlling perceptions. And how that gives rise to often justified fears of narrative control.
Is there any evidence about whether a 'trapped prior' could be related to fearfulness?
Any fact check or misinformation essay which fails to highlight that H. Biden’s laptop was his, not disinfo, becomes part of the untrustworthy media. This lie, used to censor the truth, means the 2020 election was unfair. Unfair, rigged, stolen. The loser in a close but unfair election, or game, can honestly claim it was stolen.
The desire to avoid discussing this elite lie is similar to avoidance of the Obama spy lie as part of the Collusion hoax, with the FBI acting on false info provided by HR Clinton.
Some truth can be used to obfuscate the inconvenient truth the elites want to avoid, allowing the elites to rationalize their own lies while complaining about untruths others believe.
There’s always a market for those elite rationalizations.
This might be a controversial view (from a onetime minor name in the disinfo field) but I suspect that fact-checking usually misses the mark. QAnon is an example. Those 'thick' stories being about wider intuitions, facts don't matter. The same applies to vaccine hysteria and stolen elections. But where the continued attachment to fact-checking troubles me is in how it speaks of controlling perceptions. And how that gives rise to often justified fears of narrative control.