Nothing has become clearer than the utter corruption of the legacy media and the necessity of alternative news sources to inform one's self. Rather than be led around by the nose.
I got a dose of television while I was in the lower '48 and it was bizarre. Whole classes of people letting Megyn Kelly tell them which "news" they should be thinking about and what they should think of it.
I have a lot of different sources but it is interesting that Wikileaks is the one I come to not just every day but multiple times a day.
If you have been following them it is uncanny how timely their publishing schedule is, and Assange told us how he developed a program for it. I have forgotten the name he used for it, not important to understanding it:
Wikileaks has a mathematical problem. It has an abundance of leaked information that is costly to verify and sort into searchable format. Some of these might be John Podesta's emails and some might be the King of Swaziland embezzling the public sanitation budget or whatever. So they are prioritized for processing and publication. Assange built a model that takes input from different social media and news sources and dictates what is published. If you were following the Podesta email leaks, they came out in superficially strange batching. So it is detailed enough that within a subject matter the publishing skips around according to what this model says is highest priority.
Assange talked about it during an interview as those Podesta emails were coming out. I don't see it being discussed anywhere. But he said he was really pleased with how it was working.
You have a legacy media following the military-industrial-security complex narrative, generally speaking. That narrative has the fake news peddling various propaganda broadcasts purveyed by perfectly manicured hair, suits, and dresses.
Wikileaks, given the information it has, is tweeting and publishing accordingly. It is a lot more than the occasional blockbuster source now. It is worth checking daily.
I got a dose of television while I was in the lower '48 and it was bizarre. Whole classes of people letting Megyn Kelly tell them which "news" they should be thinking about and what they should think of it.
I have a lot of different sources but it is interesting that Wikileaks is the one I come to not just every day but multiple times a day.
If you have been following them it is uncanny how timely their publishing schedule is, and Assange told us how he developed a program for it. I have forgotten the name he used for it, not important to understanding it:
Wikileaks has a mathematical problem. It has an abundance of leaked information that is costly to verify and sort into searchable format. Some of these might be John Podesta's emails and some might be the King of Swaziland embezzling the public sanitation budget or whatever. So they are prioritized for processing and publication. Assange built a model that takes input from different social media and news sources and dictates what is published. If you were following the Podesta email leaks, they came out in superficially strange batching. So it is detailed enough that within a subject matter the publishing skips around according to what this model says is highest priority.
Assange talked about it during an interview as those Podesta emails were coming out. I don't see it being discussed anywhere. But he said he was really pleased with how it was working.
You have a legacy media following the military-industrial-security complex narrative, generally speaking. That narrative has the fake news peddling various propaganda broadcasts purveyed by perfectly manicured hair, suits, and dresses.
Wikileaks, given the information it has, is tweeting and publishing accordingly. It is a lot more than the occasional blockbuster source now. It is worth checking daily.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/2jB19Q0
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire