Last Tuesday night, Glenn Youngkin (R) was elected the next governor of Virginia. At 9:15 PM, Garrit Lansing, president of WinRed, the main online fundraising vehicle for Republican candidates, sent this tweet:
Youngkin built his entire campaign on these lies. We need to start holding candidates accountable for their lies while they are campaigning, before it’s too late. Fake media sites might not be required to meet journalistic fact-checking standards, but candidates should be held to a higher standard. I am so glad I don’t live in Virginia. It’s frightening to think about what will happen in states that elect governors with so little integrity.
Not a great article to wake up to. With a captive robot media blanket over swing states (I haven’t yet checked in my locality), and disappearing educators teaching critical thinking, conservatives really may be able to suffocate liberal/progressive voices, however well funded and coordinated. So glad I have a puppy to get me outa bed at all…
So here’s a question. For years I sold radio advertising and in election years, there was a certain period of time when all stations had to give equal time and the lowest published rate to all political candidates and ads. Television stations had to do the same thing. I don’t know if this is an FCC rule or a specific federal law. I’m just wondering, if these “news sites” are considered “media”, is there a case against them for intentionally skirting these rules by not having paid advertisers and only publishing what is very clearly political content designed to influence elections for just one party or candidate during an election period without allowing equal media access to the other party or disclosing who is financing the creation and distribution of content ?
The Fairness Doctrine was abolished in the Reagan years (Thanks, Ronnie!). We need a return to that, as well as a form of it that applies to digital publishing. If "news" sites like Newsmax, OANN, and Right Side were required to provide equal time at equal rates to both sides, we know what would happen. It would take some heavy lifting in the case of the digital frontier, but I sincerely believe it could be done.
Thank you for filling in my blanks. You’re exactly right.it was the Fairness Doctrine. (Emphasis on was, I guess) I think at some point we have to just accept that some people will believe anything that comes with a headline and start focusing our efforts on who and how those headlines are making it into the homes of voters. Sadly, as powerful and helpful as this newsletter is, the people who need to read it never will. We need to push this information up the food chain and get some really smart legal analysts on the hunt for a path to shutting these practices down while avoiding freedom of speech/freedom of the press arguments. Fraud perhaps?? These “news outlets” are definitely using intentional deception for monetary or personal gain. I’m no lawyer. Just grasping for a legal strawman, I guess.
There's a fine line between press freedom/freedom of speech and shouting "Fire" in the crowded theater, y'know? Somehow (and I leave that to better legal minds) we need to craft legislation that balances on that narrow line and protects those who would willingly consume the sensationalist fodder as truth.
I agree. We can fact check…it’s done on Snopes.com etc. Why can’t Faux News and sites like this be penalized. Some people fear a slippery slope and I understand that under another Trump boob this can be dangerous. But we filter foreign transmissions etc We really must put a stop to this!
Also, the fairness doctrine never applied to the internet. I don't believe they operate actual news orgs, they're basically automated bot farms with some manual human assistance/guidance.
The Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast media. Adhering to the Doctrine was a condition for broadcasters to retain the privilege of using public airwaves. It wouldn't apply to cable media or to the internet.
I'd like to see a rule that you can't call 'news' News unless it's factually accurate, but there's probably a court that would call that an infringement on Free Speech. One could also make an argument that the obviously false should be excused from the rule, but then you not only get Bat Boy, you get *ucker Carlson.
Good point... I had forgotten it was only applied to Broadcast media. We obviously (to me, at least) need some version of it on the digital and cable side of things. Without it, there is nothing to prevent any organization from calling itself "news" and disseminating all manner of tripe in the guise of fact. Kinda like... now?
Emphasis on “equal”. How can we reestablish the fairness doctrine incl. internet publications? It feels like Russian oligarchy, dark money controls everything
Difficult as it sometimes is, I support Judd’s decision not to engage directly with subscribers other than when periodically asking for story ideas. I have however learned to simply skip Ms Adrian’s comments in their entirety, as they don’t advance the otherwise excellent conversations I follow here. Suggest you do the same with anyone you consider a “troll.”
You can & should keep reporting on these right-wing dark money machines. But until Democratic leaders actually *DO* something, or we voters do more than gasp & proclaim shock, nothing will change. And, in fact, things will only get worse. We have gotten the leaders we deserve. Calling Nancy Pelosi the greatest Speaker of the House in history? She’s not. Electing Joe Biden then watching & waiting patiently while he “studies” the idea of adding seats to SCOTUS. Of course he predictably decided against it. Both of them are pathetically ineffective. Biden’s vax mandate is now in the court system and the order has been stayed, if it goes to SCOTUS, what do you think the chances are of those right-wing hacks upholding it? And don’t even get me started on Manchin and Sinema. Two Senate sh!ts have completely derailed Biden’s agenda, yet who gets blamed? The progressive caucus in the House. Biden was right about one thing, the American people don’t see anything being done in Washington. But what he also fails to understand or acknowledge is that includes the huge nothing being done about the insurrectionists who’ve mostly gotten mild slaps. 60 days for the brazen woman who flew to DC in a private plane then declared she wouldn’t go to jail?! WTF!? Democrats are a hot mess but it’s OUR fault for waiting and watching patiently while time ticks away and the sting and shock grow numb. Frog meet boiling water. Yes I’m frustrated. I’m frustrated as HELL. And anyone who’s not, hasn’t been paying attention.
I understand, though I regret I cannot give you the source(because I failed to make note of it), that these types of ads and articles in Spanish around the country targeting Latino voters are even more numerous.
Get 'em! Great work. They're burying swing states in so much propaganda & lies sold as "news" in a manner where they can't tell that it's not legit. Networks like this need to be exposed & brought down. They mess up search results, bring no education value and set us further apart in unifying as a country to accomplish the big things ahead of us.
I don’t disagree with your conclusion about losing the races and it being the Dems fault, but again you are trolling. Quit with the right-wing buzzwords & questioning the backgrounds of Judd, Tesnim, and Rebecca. How about you reveal YOUR background?
RW operatives exist and there is a huge amount of money devoted to fighting their fake culture war which dog whistles racist themes. It has always worked with a certain segment of the population.
It's not about CRT Penny...It's about how the right wing and powerful people in it are hijacking local news and creating fake local news websites. I'm glad that you can see through fake news sites but a lot of people can't. This reporting is absolutely necessary and I think this type of thing needs to be called out more. Great work per usual Judd. I don't know what the answer is but this should be illegal. It sounds illegal so how are these bad faith operators able to get around this?
The most galling part of this anti-CRT propaganda is that it's so artlessly done. They don't even bother to change the font or the opening words, and often can't be bothered to change the very headline of these sensational pieces to make it seem as if it they aren't carbon copies.
As ham-handed as this all is, though, it seems to be working. This is why I feel it's so important to, as we expose these attempts to subvert a more nuanced view of systemic prejudice and of our own history, to confront the platforms such as Facebook and YouTube which facilitate the proliferation of this disinformation. While not a cure-all, it's an important step in curbing the influence of the anti-CRT campaign.
Either the graphic reporting how many anti-CRT stories were published in each state is incorrect, or the numbers written in the text of the article are. Looks like FL and TX got flipped. Just an FYI
This relationship map connects the dots between donors, these would-be news sites and Google. The nonprofit eligibility of groups spreading disinfo should be reviewed. https://embed.kumu.io/d607a38ed9e4a1e0e5e37c68683a7af3
Welcome to the pre-post-Biden America. CRT will keep the wind in their sails for about as long as same-sex marriage did, an issue that ensured Dubya's reelection. It lasted for about one more election cycle.
Youngkin built his entire campaign on these lies. We need to start holding candidates accountable for their lies while they are campaigning, before it’s too late. Fake media sites might not be required to meet journalistic fact-checking standards, but candidates should be held to a higher standard. I am so glad I don’t live in Virginia. It’s frightening to think about what will happen in states that elect governors with so little integrity.
Not a great article to wake up to. With a captive robot media blanket over swing states (I haven’t yet checked in my locality), and disappearing educators teaching critical thinking, conservatives really may be able to suffocate liberal/progressive voices, however well funded and coordinated. So glad I have a puppy to get me outa bed at all…
So here’s a question. For years I sold radio advertising and in election years, there was a certain period of time when all stations had to give equal time and the lowest published rate to all political candidates and ads. Television stations had to do the same thing. I don’t know if this is an FCC rule or a specific federal law. I’m just wondering, if these “news sites” are considered “media”, is there a case against them for intentionally skirting these rules by not having paid advertisers and only publishing what is very clearly political content designed to influence elections for just one party or candidate during an election period without allowing equal media access to the other party or disclosing who is financing the creation and distribution of content ?
The Fairness Doctrine was abolished in the Reagan years (Thanks, Ronnie!). We need a return to that, as well as a form of it that applies to digital publishing. If "news" sites like Newsmax, OANN, and Right Side were required to provide equal time at equal rates to both sides, we know what would happen. It would take some heavy lifting in the case of the digital frontier, but I sincerely believe it could be done.
Thank you for filling in my blanks. You’re exactly right.it was the Fairness Doctrine. (Emphasis on was, I guess) I think at some point we have to just accept that some people will believe anything that comes with a headline and start focusing our efforts on who and how those headlines are making it into the homes of voters. Sadly, as powerful and helpful as this newsletter is, the people who need to read it never will. We need to push this information up the food chain and get some really smart legal analysts on the hunt for a path to shutting these practices down while avoiding freedom of speech/freedom of the press arguments. Fraud perhaps?? These “news outlets” are definitely using intentional deception for monetary or personal gain. I’m no lawyer. Just grasping for a legal strawman, I guess.
There's a fine line between press freedom/freedom of speech and shouting "Fire" in the crowded theater, y'know? Somehow (and I leave that to better legal minds) we need to craft legislation that balances on that narrow line and protects those who would willingly consume the sensationalist fodder as truth.
I agree. We can fact check…it’s done on Snopes.com etc. Why can’t Faux News and sites like this be penalized. Some people fear a slippery slope and I understand that under another Trump boob this can be dangerous. But we filter foreign transmissions etc We really must put a stop to this!
That was part of the Fairness Doctrine, which was removed in the 80s or 90s, and required "equal time" to be offered to all sides.
Also, the fairness doctrine never applied to the internet. I don't believe they operate actual news orgs, they're basically automated bot farms with some manual human assistance/guidance.
The Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast media. Adhering to the Doctrine was a condition for broadcasters to retain the privilege of using public airwaves. It wouldn't apply to cable media or to the internet.
I'd like to see a rule that you can't call 'news' News unless it's factually accurate, but there's probably a court that would call that an infringement on Free Speech. One could also make an argument that the obviously false should be excused from the rule, but then you not only get Bat Boy, you get *ucker Carlson.
Good point... I had forgotten it was only applied to Broadcast media. We obviously (to me, at least) need some version of it on the digital and cable side of things. Without it, there is nothing to prevent any organization from calling itself "news" and disseminating all manner of tripe in the guise of fact. Kinda like... now?
Emphasis on “equal”. How can we reestablish the fairness doctrine incl. internet publications? It feels like Russian oligarchy, dark money controls everything
Fantastic Journalism!
Excellent work.. thank you. Now can you do something about the trolls commenting here?
Difficult as it sometimes is, I support Judd’s decision not to engage directly with subscribers other than when periodically asking for story ideas. I have however learned to simply skip Ms Adrian’s comments in their entirety, as they don’t advance the otherwise excellent conversations I follow here. Suggest you do the same with anyone you consider a “troll.”
You can & should keep reporting on these right-wing dark money machines. But until Democratic leaders actually *DO* something, or we voters do more than gasp & proclaim shock, nothing will change. And, in fact, things will only get worse. We have gotten the leaders we deserve. Calling Nancy Pelosi the greatest Speaker of the House in history? She’s not. Electing Joe Biden then watching & waiting patiently while he “studies” the idea of adding seats to SCOTUS. Of course he predictably decided against it. Both of them are pathetically ineffective. Biden’s vax mandate is now in the court system and the order has been stayed, if it goes to SCOTUS, what do you think the chances are of those right-wing hacks upholding it? And don’t even get me started on Manchin and Sinema. Two Senate sh!ts have completely derailed Biden’s agenda, yet who gets blamed? The progressive caucus in the House. Biden was right about one thing, the American people don’t see anything being done in Washington. But what he also fails to understand or acknowledge is that includes the huge nothing being done about the insurrectionists who’ve mostly gotten mild slaps. 60 days for the brazen woman who flew to DC in a private plane then declared she wouldn’t go to jail?! WTF!? Democrats are a hot mess but it’s OUR fault for waiting and watching patiently while time ticks away and the sting and shock grow numb. Frog meet boiling water. Yes I’m frustrated. I’m frustrated as HELL. And anyone who’s not, hasn’t been paying attention.
Please stop blaming Biden for everything...we all need to make others aware of what is going on here. I had no idea.
I understand, though I regret I cannot give you the source(because I failed to make note of it), that these types of ads and articles in Spanish around the country targeting Latino voters are even more numerous.
Get 'em! Great work. They're burying swing states in so much propaganda & lies sold as "news" in a manner where they can't tell that it's not legit. Networks like this need to be exposed & brought down. They mess up search results, bring no education value and set us further apart in unifying as a country to accomplish the big things ahead of us.
Excellent newsletter this morning! Thanks folks.
Outstanding reporting, please report and share.
I don’t disagree with your conclusion about losing the races and it being the Dems fault, but again you are trolling. Quit with the right-wing buzzwords & questioning the backgrounds of Judd, Tesnim, and Rebecca. How about you reveal YOUR background?
RW operatives exist and there is a huge amount of money devoted to fighting their fake culture war which dog whistles racist themes. It has always worked with a certain segment of the population.
It's not about CRT Penny...It's about how the right wing and powerful people in it are hijacking local news and creating fake local news websites. I'm glad that you can see through fake news sites but a lot of people can't. This reporting is absolutely necessary and I think this type of thing needs to be called out more. Great work per usual Judd. I don't know what the answer is but this should be illegal. It sounds illegal so how are these bad faith operators able to get around this?
Plenty of people care. Thats the problem since its made up.
Good stuff. Chapeau.
The most galling part of this anti-CRT propaganda is that it's so artlessly done. They don't even bother to change the font or the opening words, and often can't be bothered to change the very headline of these sensational pieces to make it seem as if it they aren't carbon copies.
As ham-handed as this all is, though, it seems to be working. This is why I feel it's so important to, as we expose these attempts to subvert a more nuanced view of systemic prejudice and of our own history, to confront the platforms such as Facebook and YouTube which facilitate the proliferation of this disinformation. While not a cure-all, it's an important step in curbing the influence of the anti-CRT campaign.
Either the graphic reporting how many anti-CRT stories were published in each state is incorrect, or the numbers written in the text of the article are. Looks like FL and TX got flipped. Just an FYI
This relationship map connects the dots between donors, these would-be news sites and Google. The nonprofit eligibility of groups spreading disinfo should be reviewed. https://embed.kumu.io/d607a38ed9e4a1e0e5e37c68683a7af3
Welcome to the pre-post-Biden America. CRT will keep the wind in their sails for about as long as same-sex marriage did, an issue that ensured Dubya's reelection. It lasted for about one more election cycle.
What can we do to effectively counter this campaign of misinformation in addition to unmasking it?