Media

'This is Nazism': The internet explodes after Kanye West praises Adolf Hitler

Disgraced rapper and antisemite Kanye West on Thursday praised Adolf Hitler while in an interview with far-right extremist and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Many are expressing outrage online.

“I see good things about Hitler,” West told Jones, as Consequence reports. “Every human being has something of value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler.”

In between those two remarks West launched into a plethora of lies about all the good things Hitler has done, including investing the microphone (false) and highways (also false.)

West doubled down, exclaiming, “I like Hitler,” and said, “the Jewish media has made us feel like Nazis and Hitler have never offered us anything of value to the world.”

West, who brought a white supremacist with him to dine with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago last week, today also claimed he loves everyone but injected antisemitic tropes about contracts and pornography.

“I think most Jews are great people,” West said, while claiming, “I agree there’s a Jewish mafia.”

West, who goes by “Ye,” astonishingly “took credit for popularizing antisemitism,” Consequence reports, “saying, ‘No one in high school knew what antisemitic meant until Ye made it popular.'”

That, too, is a lie.

The outrage online is palpable.

U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) tweeted, “JUST NOW: ‘I see good things about Hitler, also. The Jews… Every human being has something of value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler.’
— Kanye West on far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ InfoWars show.”

“This is Nazism,” he added. “When are we going to say ENOUGH?”

Many pointed to a wildly offensive tweet posted by GOP Congressman Jim Jordan, who heads the House Judiciary Republicans. After nearly two months it was removed within minutes of West praising Hitler.

U.S. Rep. Eric Falwell (D-CA) blasted Jordan, saying: “for 2 months you were cool with Jew-bashing.”


Sam Stern of Politico and MSNBC took a wider view.

“We’re all gawking at Kanye saying he sees ‘good things about Hitler’ but i can’t escape the absolute dread that people who know no better and look up to this man and stumble upon this interview will be moved, even on the margins, by him,” he tweeted. “This is not a clown show. It’s dangerous.”

As did actor Josh Gad:

“It’s not what Kanye West says that scares me. It’s that he has 30 million followers who listen to his insanity on top of a cheerleader in the form of the current owner of this platform. No one who says “I love Hitler” should be allowed any oxygen on any social platform (period).”

There is video online of Kanye West’s vile remarks. NCRM will not post or link to it.

New analysis explains the far-right evolution of Elon Musk

A new analysis is shedding light on the political devolution of Elon Musk as far-right ideologies threaten to erode Twitter amid the billionaire's takeover of the social media platform.

In a piece published by Axios, national security reporter Zachary Basu began with a timeline of Musk's political progression just in the last six months of this year.

"Elon Musk's public musings over the last six months have cemented an unmistakable new reality: The world's richest man, and owner of the de facto public square, has become more and more Republican," Basu began.

READ MORE: 'Sounds just like Trump': Elon Musk blasted for tweeting demonstrably false meme supporting conservatives

While Musk's transformation may not seem pivotal to some, Basu notes that it is important to take the business mogul's voting history into consideration. For decades, Musk has been a supporter of the Democratic Party.

"It's a stunning political transformation for the Obama, Clinton, and Biden-voting CEO of the most successful electric-vehicle company on Earth," Basu pointed out, adding, "And it's one with major real-world implications, given the significant influence Musk now wields in shaping the rules of online public debate."

In another turn of events, Musk also admitted that he would be open to voting for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) if he opted for a presidential bid in 2024.

Despite speculation of Musk switching parties, he has insisted that there is a need for "balance" in politics. According to Basu, Musk has also insisted that he "is 'neither conventionally right nor left' — but he also says the threat to free speech allegedly posed by Democrats has triggered a 'battle for the future of civilization' that trumps all other policy issues."

READ MORE: Early data shows big shifts in followers among Republicans and Democrats weeks after Twitter deal

However, Basu pointed out that Musk has become increasingly critical of Democratic leaders and lawmakers over the last several months. "Musk has frequently trolled Democrats and engaged with right-wing commentators who view him as a like-minded culture warrior," he wrote, citing a recent tweet from Musk.

"The woke mind virus has thoroughly penetrated entertainment and is pushing civilization towards suicide," Musk tweeted last week. "There needs to be a counter-narrative."

But despite Musk's growing support of Republican ideologies, Basu pointed out one potential problem that could arise in the near future: the prospective conflict of interest between Musk's business dealings and his political views.

Basu concluded by writing, "One sleeping giant threatens the Musk-GOP symbiosis: The Tesla CEO has massive business interests in China, a regime viewed by Republicans as the No. 1 geopolitical threat facing the U.S."

READ MORE: 'Republicans’ secret plan': New op-ed explains why Democrats should expose the real GOP agenda

Watch: Right-wing pastor claims religious students are joining the clergy to turn Christians into atheists

Right-wing pastor and Oasis Granger founder Lucas Miles appeared on the propaganda network Real America's Voice on Wednesday and proclaimed that students are infiltrating religious institutions of higher education to join the clergy and brainwash Christians into atheism.

Miles:

Bible college student enter Bible college as a um, you know, passionate believer and then leave an atheist. And that's hap – and then go and get a job at a pulpit someplace in America pastoring a church even though themselves, they don't believe in God. This is happening all the time, and this is one of the things that I'm really working to expose, and that also, you know, try and provide some solutions for.

Host Miranda Khan was dumbfounded at what Miles told her:

Yeah, yeah, Tuck, I, I was gonna wait to do that, but, but you have to explain that because I'm sure a lot of our viewers, their ears kist kinda perked up and said, 'what?!' And you said this is happening everywhere? I haven't heard of this happening. How do you know that based on the work that you've done? And I guess, you know, for our viewers, you're part of the American Pastor Project, so I'm sure this ties in with that. So, if you can, kind of explain this.

READ MORE: How 'MAGA culture warriors' have escalated 'threats against teachers and school administrators': study

Miles was happy to explain:

Yeah, so yeah, so actually, the founder of the American Pastor Project – and, and, this is a new initiative, we're just rollin' it out – uh and really what we're doing is we're, we're, holding pastors accountable to what I would call Christian orthodoxy, really solid, Christian teaching. We have two thousand years of Christian doctrine to look back upon, not to mention the teaching of the Old and New Testament that we can go to to see what is Christianity and what isn't Christianity. As you mentioned, this story, you know, bringing up the idea that because Jesus has a wound on his side that, that changes his gender is not a Christian teaching.

The American Pastor Project is a fundamentalist evangelical non-profit organization that promotes philosophies that are borderline medieval. While not yet designated as a hate group by watchdogs like the Southern Poverty Law Center or Antidefamation League, the conspiratorial and antisemitic* language on the APP's website appears to merit such consideration.

The APP's mission, according to its homepage, is to "eradicate Wokeism from the American pulpit" and to "protect our nation from the deceptions of false teaching and anti-Christ agendas, including, Marxism, socialism, CRT (critical race theory), universalism, critical queer theory, the slaughter of children (both in and out of the womb), climate alarmist theory, and globalism*. As such, we hereby agree to not use our pulpits, nor any extension of our ministries, to promote these false doctrines, nor to give place to their advancement."

Nonetheless, the "wound" story that Miles mentioned was an allusion to a Daily Telegraph report that outrage was triggered on Sunday after junior research fellow Joshua Heath of the University of Cambridge's Trinity College delivered a sermon that worshipers felt was blasphemous.

READ MORE: 'Chickens are coming home to roost': Nick Fuentes contradicts Ye’s campaign manager over Mar-a-Lago dinner

"In Christ's simultaneously masculine and feminine body in these works, if the body of Christ as these works suggest the body of all bodies, then his body is also the trans body," Heath said of how Christ has been depicted in art throughout history.

Miles also found Heath's interpretation of Christ on canvas to be pearl-clutchingly offensive:

That's heresy, uh, that is totally against God and we need to call it as such. And we're seeing a lot of pastors that [are[ kinda putting their head in the sand. They're not willing to deal with it. They're afraid to talk politics 'cause they're afraid to lose people in their church and split their congregations.

And can we reject from the pulpit, you know, anti-God concepts such as CRT, abortion, LGBT agenda, et cetera, in our teachings? And I'm really curious to see how many pastors are gonna take this stand.

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: Marco Rubio lashes out at same-sex marriage bill passage after attempt to create special religious rights fails

'Repugnant versus another standard': Jeanine Pirro stands up for antisemites returning to Twitter

The panelists on Tuesday's edition of The Five on Fox News were discussing Twitter owner Elon Musk reinstating banned accounts of users who had violated the site's terms and lifting the platform's policy against posting false information about COVID-19. But when the conversation turned to Musk welcoming back antisemites, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists, host "Judge" Jeanine Pirro stood up for them.

Pirro preached to co-host Jessica Tarlov:

You know, Jessica, Twitter is a private company. Where does the government get off saying, 'we're going to monitor this and we're going to watch it,' and just, from a criminal justice perspective, you investigate crimes, you don't investigate people and companies.

What is the crime so far?

READ MORE: 'Move on': Fox News host thinks immigration is more 'pressing' than Donald Trump wooing Nick Fuentes

Tarlov:

That's why we're only keeping 'an eye' on the situation. But there is a long history of tech companies working with the government to make sure that dangerous things don't happen. And that's really important. And the COVID-19 misinformation policy started under the Trump Administration. It was in early 2020 when there was tons of bad information floating around and Trump officials worked with Twitter and then Biden took over and then Biden officials worked with Twitter. The same thing goes on with YouTube...

Anchor Jesse Watters interrupted to lament that Doctor Anthony Fauci "worked with Twitter. He's not a Trump official. He's been there for eighty thousand years."

Tarlov:

Okay, but he's, whatever. Everyone knows that Fauci served in eight administrations and one of them was Donald Trump's, and one of them is Joe Biden's, and he also worked for all the guys that came before.

So let's be clear about that. When you say that Elon Musk is winning the PR battle, at the rate that he's losing advertisers, he's not winning anything. He still needs to be profitable. That was his goal, right, in taking over this. He thought he could make it better and he thought that he could make it produce more money.

Greg Gutfield, interrupting Tarlov, noted that "the advertising model is always a challenge when you're dealing with users, subscribers, or viewers. That's true. But he's getting way more users than he's ever had. And you go for a pay model, you know, that's what a lot of successful companies do, Jessica. Stay after class. We're gonna talk about the economics of Twitter."

READ MORE: What the left-liberal reactions to Twitter's new owner reveal about progressives

Tarlov rebuffed Gutfield's mansplaining and continued her assessment of Twitter:

I can't wait, but I have to be somewhere. The whole Mastadon thing I find incredibly funny, like, all of these people that I follow posting, you know, 'it if becomes unsafe for us here [Twitter], this is where you can find me.' It's not that serious. Twitter is the only social media that I have. I really enjoy it. Like, if I'm doomscrolling, I'm doing it on Twitter. And if it went away, in about a week, we would all be okay, right? Its main function is to get you up-to-date news information, at least for people who work in the business that we do and a majority of the people that we're interacting with on Twitter...

Gutfield cut off Tarlov a second time:

It replaced Drudge, basically, right? Before Twitter, you were always looking at Drudge. And now you just...

Tarlov disagreed:

Not so much for my people, but yeah, if people were looking for my people, but...

Gutfield once again chimed in to ask Tarlov if she was "hanging out with Kanye again."

She responded:

We have to talk about that. So, if, it'll be interesting to see when all of these people who have been banned – and I know Kanye was only suspended for a couple weeks because of his antisemitic tweet – but it will be interesting to see how far Musk will go in terms of restoring accounts to people who are really repugnant. And I'm sure he won't bring on, you know -- bring back Nick Fuentes or an Alex Jones. But that will be...

Pirro sided with West and Holocaust denier Fuentes:

Repugnant versus another standard. I mean...

Tarlov:

What? No. Holocaust deniers are just straight-up repugnant. So you want Nick Fuentes to have his account back?

Pirro:

Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment and the Constitution and the United States Supreme Court. It just blinked.

Tarlov:

Holocaust deniers should not be around!

Watch below via Media Matters for America or at this link.

READ MORE: Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes could become the new face of MAGA

What the left-liberal reactions to Twitter's new owner reveal about progressives

I have said what I want to say about Monsieur Muskrat’s takeover of Twitter. I don’t want to give him more of my attention than what’s necessary for doing my job. I don’t want to, by giving him my attention, give you the impression that he’s all that important.

But I do want to attend to, and therefore bring your attention to, the left-liberal reaction to his enfeebling of America’s premiere public forum. There seem to be two camps, possibly a third. I see plenty of overlap among them. Each tells us something about ourselves.

The professionals

READ MORE: Is Twitter a lost cause?

The first I’d describe as the professional critics. These are the pundits, journalists, scholars and writers who regularly participate in the public square, and who in turn influence lay participants. Call them “influencers” if you like. In any case, they, including me, spend most of their time doing stuff normal people don’t have time for.

This camp doubted Monsieur Muskrat’s claim of bringing free speech back. Never did they believe, as he does, that Twitter was being used as a weapon to silence “unpopular opinions.” But they did believe it was, as the top forum for democratic politics, useful for flattening the orders of power that constitute what most people see as normal.

Some went to extremes, but most practiced ordinary democratic politics. They argued against hate speech. They pressured the right people. They called for pushing the demagogues and anti-democrats to the distant margins of public discourse, where they belong. In time, key decision-makers in key positions at Twitter, Inc., agreed.

I have my share of disagreements with this camp, for instance, making a fetish of Monsieur Muskrat’s ongoing devolution into fascism. The man’s a billionaire. We know he’s dangerous. We don’t need to be told about each time he swallows a “red pill.” Democracy will not live or die according to the rigid fixedness of our focus.

READ MORE: Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes could become the new face of MAGA

Even so, the professionals have the basics right. Twitter houses democratic counter-speech. Those whose claim to fight for “free speech” and against “cancel culture” and “censorship” mask their real intentions – to silence voices they deem threatening and restore the public square’s social standing as the voice of the status quo.

The partisans

The second I’d describe as the popular partisans. These are people with huge followings on Twitter who say, basically, one thing – the Republicans are bad. They are genius at finding various and sundry ways of saying one thing. But make no mistake, it’s always one thing.

The popular partisans have more influence than the professional critics, because they don’t bother with things like intellectual integrity, social realities, clear reasoning, clearer writing, etc. They don’t care about the process so much as the outcome. If the outcome of their labors keeps the Democratic faithful in line, job well done.

While the popular partisans are useful – they can bring attention to deserving people and issues that professional critics cannot – I think they often do more harm than good. They frequently hold the GOP to standards only the Democrats commit to, then announce to their Twitter armies that they can’t believe what that Republican said!

Unbelievable!

Why more harm than good? Because such behavior warps political reality. The Republicans do what Republicans do, mmm? This is not only not unbelievable. It’s expected. If we can’t believe what the Republicans do, there’s not much point to democratic politics.

The same applies to Twitter. The platform no longer enforces rules that were designed to prevent users from making and spreading misinformation and lies. It has allowed back some of those aforementioned demagogues and anti-democrats. The popular partisans will tell us that this is an outrage! But it’s all quite believable, or should be, as tilting public opinion in the direction of elite interest is what elites have done in America since forever.

This wouldn’t be so bad, I suppose, if it weren’t for a big deleterious consequence. I’m talking about an attitude toward democratic politics according to which the only way to advance progressive issues is by stopping the Republicans from doing what they do.

Why is this deleterious?

It’s preemptive surrender.

It puts the fate of democracy, freedom, equality and liberal republican values in the hands of people who will abuse them all – if not smother them in the cradle. When you make abusers responsible for democracy, you can pretty much expect them to do what they do.

Believable!

The popular partisans send, in effect, an anti-democratic message (perhaps without knowing it). That message is, alas, that democracy depends on bad people choosing to do good things. If anything is unbelievable, it’s that. No, democracy depends on what it’s always depended on – democratic people practicing democratic politics.

The spectators

What’s the third group? Well, I suppose it’s not a group as much as a tendency, but let’s call them the amused spectators. These people might be political cynics or political realists. They are definitely not political idealists. Not surprisingly, they are often Black. For instance, they believe voting is a defensive maneuver first. Ideals come later.

Their tendency is to hope for the best, but expect bad people to do bad things. It expects good people to do good things, too. It believes democracy’s greatest threat isn’t the bad people who hate it. It’s the good people who can’t or won’t believe believable things can happen.

Meanwhile, the amused spectators take pleasure in watching professional critics pushing their idea-boulders uphill while the popular partisans make those idea-boulders all the heavier.

They are not surprised to see that a billionaire born unaccountable to consequences everyone else is accountable to is busy tilting public opinion in the direction of elite interests. Elites have done it before. They do it now. They’ll do it again. The answer isn’t empty outrage.

It’s democratic people practicing democratic politics.

READ MORE: Tucker Carlson's Fox News producer is an out gay man helping 'ramp up' hate: LGBTQ journalist

Tucker Carlson's Fox News producer is an out gay man helping 'ramp up' hate: LGBTQ journalist

Fox News propagandist Tucker Carlson, whose nightly show frequently has the largest reach of any on cable news, regularly attacks the LGBTQ community with fear-mongering and hate-filled segments about gay people, transgender people, “groomers” and the latest target: “drag queen story hours.”

His senior executive producer, who oversees Carlson’s media empire at Fox News, is a married, out, gay man named Justin Wells, according to veteran journalist and SiriusXM Progress host Michelangelo Signorile, who is calling it “beyond horrific to think a gay man has helped to shape and widely disseminate a message of hate against LGBTQ people.”

Last week, in the wake of the horrific anti-LGBTQ hate crime mass shooting Carlson hosted a guest, the head of the so-called “Gays Against Groomers,” who told Fox News viewers the attack on LGBTQ people at a gay bar in Colorado Springs was “predictable” and warned that these hate crime massacres will continue, “until we end this evil agenda” of gender-affirming care.

Carlson has repeatedly hosted Jaimee Mitchell, the Gays Against Groomers founder who fearmongers against LGBTQ people, with the apparent consent of Wells, who “helped promulgate the kind of hate that leads to violence,” says Signorile.

READ MORE: Watch: Chasten Buttigieg Says Tucker Carlson Is Focusing on ‘Hate’ After Host’s Latest Anti-Gay Attack on His Husband

“It’s unlikely that any narrative would get broadcast by Tucker without significant buy-in from Justin,” Angelo Carusone, President and CEO of media watchdog Media Matters, told Signorile.

Indeed, referring to the Colorado Springs mass shooting massacre, Signorile noted it is “the same kind of nightclub at which Wells, in years past, danced the night away in Miami Beach and elsewhere, liberating himself from the world outside and surely never imagining he’d be shot dead.”

“Now he’s aided the extremists who deny that sense of safety and liberation to every future generation of queer people,” says Signorile, explaining that “Wells runs the entire Tucker Carlson operation, and is responsible for imprinting the Tucker Carlson brand, which is all about emboldening white heterosexual male grievance, furthering the racist conspiracy of ‘replacement theory’ and pushing an increasingly virulent anti-LGBTQ agenda.”

READ MORE: Tucker Carlson Serves Up 12-Minute Long Homophobic Hate-Filled Rant Attacking Pete Buttigieg Over ‘Equity’

One of Carlson’s frequent LGBTQ targets is Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, who he has called an “unqualified ‘kid’ who ‘breastfeeds,’ and has no business running the agency,” as Mediaite reported.

“And as Carlson further pushed white nationalism, attacked transgender people and embraced Hungary’s authoritarian leader Victor Orban,” Signorile reports, “Wells, in 2021, was named a Vice President at Fox News, in charge of all Carlson product that airs on Fox News TV as well as on Fox’s streaming network, Fox Nation.”

Signorile says, “it’s quite stunning that Wells would work for Carlson, who has a well-known history of visceral homophobia. That’s something that came to light again last year when it became known that Carlson had offered a tribute to Dan White, the assassin of San Francisco supervisor and gay civil rights leader Harvey Milk, in his college yearbook back in 1991, as well as to the late vociferously anti-gay Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, who whipped up homophobia during the height of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s.”

READ MORE: Tucker Carlson Once Allegedly Bragged He Belonged to a ‘Society’ Named After the Man Who Assassinated Harvey Milk

“I wrote about those jarring revelations when they surfaced last year,” he continues, “as well as about what I dubbed Carlson’s ‘pathological obsession with homosexuality’ throughout his career. Carlson has expressed revulsion at homosexuality, and in one incident he reveled in a violent response. In a TV interview in 2007 he described having smashed a man’s head ‘against the stall’ in a public restroom, after the man ‘bothered’ him.”

“Wells, as a gay man, only emboldens Carlson further,” Signorile concludes. “He gives him permission to launch the ugly attacks and helps Carlson validate, for himself (and likely for executives at Fox News), the vitriol he espouses. That makes Justin Wells’ presence as the powerful gay man behind Tucker Carlson all the more newsworthy. And all the more dangerous.”

Signorile notes that his reporting is not an outing.

“This story is not, however, about a warped closet case, tormented by self-loathing, hiding his true self while bashing those like him. And thus, this story is not an outing, which involves exposing someone who covers up their sexual orientation while publicly presenting as heterosexual — though it certainly may be a startling revelation to a great many. It is, rather, about connecting the dots regarding a reality that seems to have been hiding in plain sight.”

You can read Signorile’s entire report on his Substack newsletter.

Judge gives Devin Nunes the green light to sue NBC Universal for libel against MSNBC's Rachel Maddow

A district court judge for New York's Southern District has opened the door for former Republican lawmaker Devin Nunes to file a lawsuit against NBC Universal for his defamation claims against MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.

According to Mediaite, the ruling in Nunes' favor comes a year after his attempt to file the lawsuit over Maddow's remarks condemning him for his involvement with Andriy Derkach, a Ukrainian legislator now facing U.S. government sanctions for being an alleged Russian agent.

Per the news outlet: "The commentary relates to an incident back in 2019, when Nunes’ office received a package from Derkach while he was ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence."

READ MORE: Devin Nunes pushes absurd conspiracy theories about Obama and 'nude pictures of Trump' at impeachment hearing

On Tuesday, November 29, Judge P. Kevin Castel delivered his ruling which, according to the news outlet, stated that "the package 'was handled solely by Nunes’ staff and delivered, unopened, to the offices of the FBI. That same day, Nunes sent a letter to Attorney General William P. Barr advising him of the receipt of the package.'”

Nunes' claim is in reference to an MSNBC broadcast that aired back in March 2021 where Maddow discussed "a DNI report that said Derkach and others sought to use prominent Americans to “launder their narratives to US officials and audiences.”

During the segment, Maddow mentioned the package Nunes received from Derkach as she insisted that the former lawmaker “refused to hand it over to the FBI, which is what you should do if you get something from somebody who is sanctioned by the U.S. as a Russian agent.”

Nunes' legal team argues that NBCUniversal was aware that he turned over the package to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Maddow's remarks were an effort to defame his character.

READ MORE: ‘You should be ashamed’: Nunes ripped for attacking impeachment witnesses in ‘lie-filled opening statement’

“MSNBC and Maddow had no source that had told them prior to publication of the Statements that Plaintiff had ‘refused’ to turn over the Derkach package to the FBI,” the complaint says It continues to state Maddow “provided no source for the defamatory Statements about Plaintiff because, in truth, Maddow fabricated the Statements, including the story that Plaintiff ‘refused’ to turn over the package to the FBI.”

READ MORE: Devin Nunes complains that Republicans are being censored — while talking to about 1.5m viewers

Is Twitter a lost cause?

This particular social media giant may be beyond saving, but the idea of a public-interest social network is something worth fighting for.

Twitter is unraveling at the speed of a SpaceX rocket. Things have gotten so bad under the erratic reign of Elon Musk that the future of the social-media company is in question. What, if anything, should be done to pull Twitter from the brink?

From the moment Musk walked through the door, he’s sought to impose his unique brand of creative destruction on Twitter. But the results have been less than brilliant, and far more damaging.

Musk’s takeover deal itself saddled him and his investors with a $13-billion debt load that could force Twitter to default on payment as early as next April, with the possibility of banks forcing the company into bankruptcy.

Bad financing was only the beginning. To help service his debt Musk drastically slashed costs, including laying off half of Twitter’s staff, thousands of the company’s outside contractors, and forcing more than a thousand others to walk off the job. He decimated Twitter’s trust and safety and human-rights teams, making it all but impossible for the company to uphold and enforce critical user safeguards and content-moderation standards.

His on-again-off-again plans to implement a blue-check subscription service were on and off again last week, but not before Twitter’s chief privacy, information security and compliance officers resigned, reportedly out of concern about the plan’s potential risk to user privacy.

On Thanksgiving, Musk granted a “general amnesty,” effectively inviting back on the platform some of the most dangerous purveyors of hate and disinformation. This impulsive decision-making has played poorly with advertisers. Half of Twitter’s 100 top advertisers have pulled their placements since Musk took over, costing the company tens of millions of dollars in monthly revenues. Several told the #StopToxicTwitter campaign that the platform’s weakened content-moderation had increased the risks of their brands appearing adjacent to some of the most toxic content.

The real value of social media

In the midst of all this wreckage one thing is obvious: If Twitter is going to be saved, Musk isn’t the person to do the job. Instead, the company needs to be run by someone who understands that the real value of any social-media venture lies in its ability to attract, keep and serve users.

It turns out that most people go online to find information and news, stay in touch with friends and family, and research how to do things. These users aren’t visiting social media to be harassed or to harass others, or to be scammed by those seeking to make a buck or a billion by selling dubious verification services. Content moderation is a way to give people what they say that they want. As businesses that still rely on advertising, companies like Twitter need to enforce community standards to ensure brand and user safety.

But saving Twitter might require even more: that we recognize the public goods of social networking and put in place additional measures that protect these values.

Some of us have been around the internet long enough to remember the euphoria that accompanied the early days of the Arab Spring, when activists from Tunisia to Iran took to social media to organize pro-democratic street protests. “If you want to liberate a society,” Egyptian activist Wael Ghonim said at the time, “just give them the Internet.”

In retrospect, the sentiment seems naive: The internet was never much of a safe haven for women, communities of color, activists, dissidents or other marginalized communities. And yet many of these same groups have leveraged social media’s global reach to organize and engage more people in the struggle for a more equitable and democratic world.

Rebuilding the public square

So simply giving people the internet is not enough. We need access to an internet that is free from blocking, throttling and other forms of discrimination imposed by internet providers like AT&T and Comcast (a principle known as Net Neutrality). And we need legal assurances that these providers—along with online platforms—won’t conspire with unscrupulous government authorities and data brokers to violate user privacy and subject us to economic and civil injustice.

People need social-media companies to prevent their algorithms from promoting the most incendiary content, to protect all users from disinformation regardless of the languages they speak, and to be transparent about their business models, AI and moderation practices.

We also need to work together to build online spaces that are free from predatory commercial influences, spaces that capture what was good about Twitter or any other commercial platform, without succumbing to profit incentives that often push malicious, sensationalist or just plain false content, while downranking valuable news and information.

For Twitter to survive, its leadership must understand that the company’s success is intertwined with its public-service obligation. For Musk that concept is likely too high a hill to climb, but it’s one he or his successor can’t afford to ignore. Twitter’s ultimate value is tied up in its users and their ability to connect and communicate for the benefit of each other and everyone else.

Twitter may be beyond saving, but the idea of a public-interest social network is something worth fighting for, with or without Elon Musk.

Twitter rolls back COVID misinformation policy — opening the door for the resurgence of conspiracy theories

Twitter has announced that it will no longer enforce its policy to prohibit the spread of misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic, an initiative that will likely cause conspiracy theories to become more amplified on the social media platform.

According to Axios, the notice was added to Twitter's transparency page. It reads, "Effective November 23, 2022, Twitter is no longer enforcing the COVID-19 misleading information policy."

The latest announcement comes more than two years after Twitter began cracking down on COVID misinformation. As the pandemic caused global unrest, conspiracy theorists wreaked havoc online by spreading false information about the deadly virus and the efforts to mitigate it.

READ MORE: Florida's surgeon general says Twitter violated his 'human rights' by removing COVID-19 anti-vax post

During that two-year period, Twitter also rolled out a number of other policies to fight the spread of misinformation.

"Twitter announced last year that it would label tweets with potentially misleading information about COVID-19 vaccines, and introduce a strike system that can lead to permanent account suspension," Axios reported.

"Between January 2020 and September 2022, Twitter said suspended more than 11,000 accounts for violating its COVID misinformation policy and removed more than 100,000 pieces of content that did so," the news outlet added.

In addition to the latest COVID policy rollback in the midst of Elon Musk's Twitter takeover, the billionaire businessman has also announced a "general amnesty" policy for individuals who had their Twitter accounts suspended. According to Musk, the amnesty policy will specifically be for individuals who had "'not broken the law' or engaged in 'egregious spam.'"

READ MORE: 'Jewish space laser lady' Marjorie Taylor Greene mocked for calling pundit a 'communist' over Musk’s Twitter takeover attempt

That decision came after Musk announced Twitter reactivated the accounts of former President Donald Trump and rapper Ye, formally known as Kanye West.

READ MORE: 'Good grief': NBC mocked for saying experts 'puzzling' over more Republicans dying of COVID-19

Watch: Fox host Jesse Watters orders women to stop 'calling us toxic' because 'men are on a mission'

The Fox News quintet on Monday's edition of The Five dedicated a segment to a report about pharmaceutical heiress Annabella Rockwell that was published in The New York Post on Sunday.

Rockwell purported to the tabloid that she "wound up 'totally indoctrinated' into viewing the world as a toxic patriarchy and herself as an oppressed victim — and eventually had to be reprogrammed" while attending Mount Holyoke University in 2011.

"This professor tells me about the patriarchy,” Rockwell told the paper. "I barely knew what the word meant. I didn’t know what she was talking about. I wasn’t someone that into feminism. I just knew that I felt I had always been free to do what I wanted. I never experienced sexism. But I was told there’s the patriarchy and you don’t even understand it’s been working against you your whole life. You’ve been oppressed and you didn’t even know it. Now you have to fight it. And I just went down this deep rabbit hole."

READ MORE: Fox News wants Halloween canceled over fentanyl

On Monday, The Five spun Rockwell's story into an irrational diatribe.

"You know Jesse [Watters], what Dana [Perino] is talking about is the fact that fifty-eight of the top one hundred US medical schools have mandatory programs in the fundamentals of critical race theory that we've been told pretty much doesn't exist," host Judge Jeanine Pirro sneered.

As Pirro noted, CRT is taught at the college level, predominately to law students. But here Pirro muddied the waters by implying that the refutations of right-wing claims about CRT being a part of grade school curricula also apply to institutions of higher education.

"It's a woke indoctrination to the doctors and they're raising social justice as a focus. Is that relevant in medical school teaching?" Pirro asked Watters, who majored in history and is not a trained medical professional. But he nonetheless offered his opinion and declared himself a victim of scenarios that exist in his head.

READ MORE: 'Whites are a minority in California': Fox News host claims Dems want voting 'on-ramp' for undocumented immigrants

"Wellllllllll, I don't want to be discriminated against as a straight white male by my physician. Like I said, if there's a mistake made and I undergo some radical gender reassignment surgery cause someone has it in for me, that's gonna be a problem. And if you wanna save the three hundred dollars a day to de-program someone from being woke, watch Fox. It's the cost of a basic cable subscription," Watters pontificated.

"And I want to speak exactly to the heiress right now. Dana, hold my hand," Watters gestured to Perino. "Women need men, and men need women. We need each other. And if you understand nature, you understand there is not a war between the sexes. We need to make love, not war. And you need to stop chopping your hair off and calling us 'toxic.' We are on a mission. Yes, we peacock, but we peacock for your attention. So fall in love and let's all live happily ever after."

Watters added that "there is something I do want to address with her now as an heiress. It's a little bit of a sticky situation because in a way you're almost like a very successful, wealthy man and you don't know if someone is falling in love with you for your money or for your heart. So I would advise her, you can fall in love, but sign a prenup."

Fox pundit Greg Gutfield responded with a "wow."

Pirro then cited Rockwell's account that "professors encouraged alienation from the parents and offered their homes to stay in. If they didn't, the kids were ostracized."

Watch below via Media Matters for America or at this link.

READ MORE: 'Coulda shoved this down their throats': Jesse Watters scolds Lindsey Graham over timing of abortion ban

Early data shows big shifts in followers among Republicans and Democrats weeks after Twitter deal

Several high-profile Republican representatives gained tens of thousands of new followers on Twitter after billionaire Elon Musk acquired the social media network, according to an analysis by The Washington Post.

The report found that Democratic members of Congress have suffered a decline, with lawmakers like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Rep. Adam B. Schiff, D-Calif., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., all losing around 100,000 Twitter followers after three weeks on Musk's Twitter. In comparison, Republicans Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ga., and Jim Jordan, Ohio, both gained more than 300,000 followers in the same time span.

Follower fluctuation is affected by several factors, including the mass suspension of bot accounts, but the patterns found in the report suggest liberals are leaving the site in the tens of thousands while conservatives are enthusiastically joining, starkly changing the demographics of the site under Musk's control.

Republicans on Twitter gained an average of 8,000 followers while Democrats lost 4,000, according to The Post's analysis of data from ProPublica's Represent tool which tracks congressional Twitter activity.

The Tesla owner bought Twitter for $44 billion last month with the promise of free speech on the site without a "free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences!" However, Twitter users have already started abusing the site's platform, with reports of hate speech rising.

Musk also declared — using an unscientific Twitter poll on Nov. 19 as a popular vote — that he would reinstate several accounts that broke community guidelines in the past, including former President Donald Trump who was banned following the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

"I'm fine with Trump not tweeting," Musk tweeted on Friday night after the former president said he would stay on his own site Truth Social. "The important thing is that Twitter correct a grave mistake in banning his account, despite no violation of the law or terms of service."

Shortly following the informal poll, Greene gained 45,000 followers while Warren and Sanders each lost more than 22,000. Jordan's follower count also increased by 290,000, nearly 10 percent more, in the past month. These trends continued for days according to the report.

Since Musk's acquisition, several advertisers and celebrities have left the site, raising concerns that they will be unable to make money to maintain Twitter's functionality. More than a third of the site's top marketers have halted advertising, according to an analysis from The Post.

While Musk has previously stated that he is a political moderate, he increasingly sided with far-right figures on the site who have claimed they were censored by Twitter in the past, despite producing no proof.

Since Musk's takeover, the quality of conversation on Twitter has "decayed" due to a surge of extremism and misinformation, according to a report from researchers at Tuft University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

Social media CEOs rarely endorse political parties, but Musk has swiftly broken this tradition, tweeting on Friday night that he would back Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis if he runs for president in 2024, calling him a "sensible and centrist choice."

Musk also advised his 119 million Twitter followers to support Republicans the night before the midterm elections.

"While it's true that I've been under unfair & misleading attack for some time by leading Democrats, my motivation here is for centrist governance, which matches the interests of most Americans," Musk said after urging his followers to vote red.

Musk made his allegiance to the Republican Party clear long before his acquisition. While onstage at a tech conference in September 2021, Musk said Biden's White House was "not the friendliest administration" after Tesla was not invited to a meeting on electric car production. He later claimed that the Biden administration was "controlled by the unions," in apparent stark contrast to his own company, which has resisted unionization efforts.

In May, he also tweeted that while he previously voted for Democrats because "they were (mostly) the kindness party," they have since become "the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican."

During a company-wide meeting earlier this month, Musk claimed that he is undergoing a "moderate-wing takeover of Twitter," and proposed a "dual-headquarter" in California and Texas to cater to "people with a wide array of views even if we disagree with those views."

Musk has amplified several far-right accounts, spending his weekends interacting with people like Ian Miles Cheong — a Ron DeSantis supporter who falsely claimed the Buffalo mass shooter was a leftist — and the ultraconservative anonymous account Catturd. He also agreed with far-right fans such as Tom Fitton who tweeted: "[Musk] should prepare for increased attacks and retaliation from Biden administration, leftist politicians, media competitors."

"Sure as night follows day," Musk replied.

In addition to reinstating Trump's account, he has also restored Greene's account on the site. Greene was suspended in January after spreading misinformation on the pandemic, a violation of Twitter's policies.

Other account restorations went to self-described "misogynist" Andrew Tate, "anti-politically correct" speaker Jordan Peterson, and the anti-trans conservative satire account The Babylon Bee.

Furthermore, an analysis of hundreds of Musk's replies since he took control of the platform shows that he has created a "filter bubble" of right-wing opinions, according to French outlet Le Monde.

Musk has also given attention to several openly conspiratorial figures such as Kim Dotcom, who is wanted under an extradition warrant to the United States for his role as CEO of a Megaupload, a host server that spreads conspiracy theories about the pandemic and election. Dinesh D'Souza, an election denier, also got a personalized reply from Musk after claiming Twitter was censoring conservatives.

5 major newspapers push US to drop Assange charges: 'Publishing is not a crime'

The five major media outlets that collaborated with WikiLeaks in 2010 to publish explosive stories based on confidential diplomatic cables from the U.S. State Department sent a letter Monday calling on the Biden administration to drop all charges against Julian Assange, who has been languishing in a high-security London prison for more than three years in connection with his publication of classified documents.

"Twelve years after the publication of 'Cablegate,' it is time for the U.S. government to end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets," reads the letter signed by the editors and publishers of The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, and El País. "Publishing is not a crime."

The letter comes as Assange, the founder and publisher of WikiLeaks, is fighting the U.S. government's attempt to extradite him to face charges of violating the draconian Espionage Act of 1917. If found guilty on all counts, Assange would face a prison sentence of up to 175 years for publishing classified information—a common journalistic practice.

Press freedom organizations have vocally warned that Assange's prosecution would pose a threat to journalists the world over, a message that the five newspapers echoed in their letter Monday.

"This indictment sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine America's First Amendment and the freedom of the press," the letter reads. "Obtaining and disclosing sensitive information when necessary in the public interest is a core part of the daily work of journalists. If that work is criminalized, our public discourse and our democracies are made significantly weaker."

The "Cablegate" leak consisted of more than 250,000 confidential U.S. diplomatic cables that offered what the Times characterized as "an unprecedented look at back-room bargaining by embassies around the world."

Among other revelations, the documents confirmed that the U.S. carried out a 2009 airstrike in Yemen that killed dozens of civilians. Cables released by WikiLeaks showed that then-Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh assured U.S. Central Command Gen. David Petraeus that the Yemeni government would "continue saying the bombs are ours, not yours."

The media outlets' letter notes that "the Obama-Biden administration, in office during the WikiLeaks publication in 2010, refrained from indicting Assange, explaining that they would have had to indict journalists from major news outlets too."

"Their position placed a premium on press freedom, despite its uncomfortable consequences," the letter continues. "Under Donald Trump, however, the position changed. The [Department of Justice] relied on an old law, the Espionage Act of 1917 (designed to prosecute potential spies during World War One), which has never been used to prosecute a publisher or broadcaster."

Despite dire warnings from rights groups, the Biden administration has decided to continue pursuing Assange's extradition and prosecution.

In June, the United Kingdom formally approved the U.S. extradition request even after a judge warned extradition would threaten Assange's life.

Assange's legal team filed an appeal in August, alleging that the WikiLeaks founder is "being prosecuted and punished for his political opinions."

Brutal St. Louis newspaper editorial pleads with Dems to save the country from GOP House 'toddlers'

According to the editorial board of the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the current Democratic majority on the House has a duty to wrap up as much business as it can before the Republicans take over in January with their slim majority planning on launching multiple investigations of the Joe Biden administration instead of dealing with the country's needs.

In a word, the editors referred to the House Republicans under possible House Speaker Kevin McCarthy as "toddlers" who will require constant supervision.

Getting right to the point, the editors wrote, "Just as it’s a good idea to child-proof a home before having toddlers over for a birthday party, congressional Democrats should be doing what they can during the current lame-duck session to prepare for the incoming Republican House majority — a crowd that has literally announced its intention to threaten America’s fiscal stability, block election reforms and abandon Ukraine."

Case in point, they wrote, are plans by Republicans to create chaos by using the debt ceiling as a "tool" to get their way.

"Refusing to raise the debt ceiling when necessary isn’t akin to reining in spending. The spending has already happened; this is akin to refusing to pay the bills when they come due, jeopardizing economic stability domestically and globally. Congress should, right now, raise the debt ceiling enough to ensure it won’t be an issue again for at least two years, depriving [Republicans] of this particular mischief," the editors warned.

Taking up GOP threats to reduce aid to Ukraine and calling the Republican Party's seemingly siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin as "weird," they added, "many Republicans are threatening that aid — apparently having forgotten that America is supposed to stand up against tyranny and for democracy."

"Though Republicans will control the House in January, the Nov. 8 elections cannot by any stretch be read as a mandate" the editors asserted based upon the failure of Republicans to achive the "red wave" they promised at the midterms.

"Democrats who still control Congress now have not just a right but a duty to ensure that the worst instincts of the incoming majority are reined in before they’re seated," they added before concluding with a sardonic, " "Let’s cover those plug sockets."

You can read the whole editorial here.

Jaron Lanier: 'Extinction is on the table as an outcome' of the chaos caused by social media

Computer scientist, composer, artist, and author Jaron Lanier has for years been outspoken about his total avoidance of social media platforms because of the harm that they inflict on their users and the detrimental impacts that they have on societies. In a 2018 conversation with Vox producer Eric Johnson, Lanier decried people who refuse to delete their accounts even though they can.

"You have even more of a responsibility to see if you can get out of it than someone who genuinely is dependent on it. So, I think that that argument has a situation exactly backwards. I mean, I and you and the people we tend to know are privileged. We’re wealthier than ever. We have more options. That puts a moral onus on us to make some decisions that do what little we can to help those who are less fortunate, and this is one of those things," he said.

"If you are actually in a position to quit and you don’t, you’re making yourself part of the problem. You’re not doing anything to free those who are more trapped. You’re only enslaving them more by entrenching the system. As an affluent or valuable person to the system, you’re the one that the whole system is being funded by," he added, later comparing online platforms to "gambling addiction."

READ MORE: By destroying Twitter, Elon Musk reveals contempt for democracy

On Sunday, Lanier warned in an interview with The Guardian that the takeovers of tech giants like Twitter pose a fatal danger to the future existence of the human race.

“People survive by passing information between themselves,” Lanier explained to reporter Edward Helmore. “We’re putting that fundamental quality of humanness through a process with an inherent incentive for corruption and degradation. The fundamental drama of this period is whether we can figure out how to survive properly with those elements or not.”

Lanier believes that powerful digital arenas such as Twitter, whose owners allow misinformation, conspiracy theories, and hate speech to flourish, are exacerbating the threat that humanity faces.

“There are all kind of intermediaries. They might be the people who own a platform, recently Elon Musk, or third parties who are good at sneaking in influence. The interveners can be varied. Some are official, some are revealed, others hidden. Some are competent, some incompetent. Some are random, like an algorithm that someone made but didn’t understand," Lanier said. “I still think extinction is on the table as an outcome. Not necessarily, but it’s a fundamental drama. If we can coordinate ourselves to solve the climate crisis it’s a fundamental sign we haven’t become completely dysfunctional."

READ MORE: Half of Twitter’s top advertisers flee as Elon Musk welcomes Trump back

The story continues here.

'We’re looking at you': Denver newspaper slams Lauren Boebert’s for 'hateful speech' after Colorado attack

Rep. Lauren Boebert’s critics on both the left and the right were disappointed when the far-right MAGA congresswoman narrowly defeated Democrat Adam Frisch in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District. It was an incredibly close race; as of Friday morning, November 18, Boebert was ahead by only 551 votes in a very GOP-leaning district.

During the campaign, Frisch and his supporters — including some Never Trump conservatives — vehemently called out Boebert as an extremist. The congresswoman has drawn plenty of criticism for her inflammatory anti-Islam and anti-gay comments, and in a scathing editorial published on November 22, the Denver Post’s editorial board argues that her anti-gay rhetoric has contributed to the type of hate that led to the attack on Club Q, a gay nightclub in Colorado Springs.

On Saturday, November 19, a gunman killed five people and injured at least 18 others when he attacked Club Q. The day after the attack, Boebert tweeted, “The news out of Colorado Springs is absolutely awful. This morning the victims & their families are in my prayers. This lawless violence needs to end and end quickly.”

READ MORE: Lauren Boebert 'can go to Iran' if she wants religion directing the government: GOP strategist Rick Wilson

But the Post’s editorial board argues that Boebert’s statement doesn’t mean much in light of all her comments attacking gays, transgender Americans and drag queens.

“This is the same person who has previously offered up these gems: ‘Take your children to CHURCH, not drag bars’ and ‘We went from Reading Rainbow to Randy Rainbow in a few decades, but don’t dare say the Left is grooming our kids!’,” the Post’s editorial board says of the MAGA congresswoman. “Boebert was rightly excoriated for her role in elevating hateful speech against the LGBTQ community. As an added bonus, her hardline positions on gun control, ruling out even common-sense measures, mean she would not have supported any efforts that might have kept guns out of this shooter’s possession.

The Post’s editorial board adds, “Boebert’s profile made her an easy target for those pointing out the dangerous environment created when we fail to treat our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer neighbors as equals. But she is not the only one in this state, let alone the nation, guilty of perpetuating the rhetoric that fuels fear and hate.”

The editorial is not subtle, telling Boebert that when it comes to calling out hateful rhetoric, “We’re looking at you.”

And the Post’s editorial board laments that hateful anti-gay rhetoric from the far right continues after the assault on Club Q.

READ MORE: 'Reaping the consequences of eternal damnation': Jenna Ellis says Club Q victims are burning in Hell

“As the dead are buried, and as this case works its way through the courts, we will no doubt be assaulted with the same vile remarks we’ve heard before about the LGBTQ community,” the Post’s editorial board writes. “Those voices should never be elevated, and we are disheartened to see them creeping into mainstream social media channels. We are disappointed voters decided Boebert’s behavior should, as of the latest vote tally, be rewarded with another term in Congress.”

READ MORE: GOP congressman deluged with angry responses over Club Q tweet

'Anti-woke' right-wing bank GloriFi shuts down a month after launch

GloriFi — an “anti-woke” bank endorsed by right-wing media figure Candace Owens and supported by millions in startup funds, raised with help from gay right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel — has shut down barely a month after it launched.

GloriFi advertised itself as a bank where investors would be “free to celebrate your love of God and country without fear of cancellation.” It promised its financial backers a user base filled with “plumbers, electricians and police officers,” who “are fed up with big banks that don’t share their values,” Rolling Stone reported.

However, the bank continually pushed its launch date back. It opened in September. Now, barely a month later, it has shut down.

The company’s one-page website now reads, “the Board of Directors and leadership of GloriFi have come to the heartbreaking conclusion that we need to begin winding down the company’s operations.”

GloriFi’s Chief Marketing Officer Cathy Landtrop blamed the start-up’s failure on “financial challenges related to startup mistakes, the failing economy, reputational attacks, and multiple negative stories.”

The bank “promised checking and savings accounts and debit cards for conservatives,” The Root reported, but “it was so concerned with pushing a culture-wars narrative that it forgot that banks in startup mode are supposed to be focused primarily on one thing: offering attractive rates on deposits to bring in new customer accounts and to be able to expand to more products like car loans and mortgages.”

The company’s website now instructs its investors on how to receive their funds back. So much for celebrating “your love of God and country without fear of cancellation.”

Half of Twitter’s top advertisers flee as Elon Musk welcomes Trump back

While billionaire Elon Musk has reinstated the Twitter accounts of insurrectionists and transphobes like Donald Trump and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), half of Twitter’s top 100 advertisers have pulled ads on the microblogging platform over the last two weeks, according to The Washington Post and Media Matters.

Analyzing data from Pathmatics, a digital marketing trend research company, the publication found that vehicle maker Jeep; food makers Mars, Coca-Cola, Kraft Heinz, Nestle, and Kellogg; telecommunications corporations AT&T and Verizon; fashion brand Chanel; hoteliers Hilton and Marriott; auto manufacturers Chevrolet and Ford; pharmaceutical giant Merck; and beer brewer Samuel Adams have all stopped advertising on the site since Musk took it over.

“Mars started suspending advertising activities on Twitter in late September when we learned of some significant brand safety and suitability incidents that impacted our brand,” the company wrote to the Post. The other companies didn’t submit statements.

While Musk has been laying off and firing Twitter employees in order to ostensibly save money and make Twitter profitable, it is still heavily dependent on ads. “Nearly 90 percent of the company’s $5 billion in revenue [in 2021] came from advertising,” the Post reported. Collectively, the companies invested over $750 million in advertising on Twitter in 2022 alone, Media Matters reported.

The ad cuts are particularly notable considering that many companies spend their end-of-year budgets during the holiday season in order to lure customers. But since Musk has increasingly presented himself as an unpredictable right-wing public figure, companies seem increasingly worried about being connected to his personal brand.

“Twitter, for most of these brands, has never been a critical part of their ad buy,” Andrew Lipsman, an Insider Intelligence analyst who covers retail and e-commerce, told the publication. “It’s a big enough channel that they are going to get those dollars, but it’s one of the easiest pools of spending to remove.”

In early November, Musk alienated advertisers by promising to “name and shame” any companies who pulled ads from the site. He also damaged some companies’ public images after pranksters used Twitter’s new blue check verification system to imitate them and publish false and offensive messages under their brand names.

Musk has since pulled back his name-and-shame threat in a letter to advertisers, promising companies in a letter that Twitter wouldn’t become a “free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences!”

Concurrently, civil rights groups have been pressuring the site’s top advertisers to commit to pulling their ad dollars if Musk undermines the website’s community standards and allows hate speech and disinformation to proliferate on it.

If Musk’s welcome of Trump and Greene is any indication, toxicity will indeed proliferate on the site under the guise of “free speech,” causing even more advertisers to flee.

'Gays Against Groomers' founder predicts more anti-LGBTQ+ violence until 'we end the evil agenda'

On Tuesday evening's edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight, the namesake Fox News angertainer hosted Jaimee Michell, an activist who founded the non-profit organization "Gays Against Groomers." It claims to be "a coalition of gay people who oppose the recent trend of indoctrinating, sexualizing, and medicalizing children under the guise of 'LGBTQIA+.'" The wording on its website, however, strongly indicates that it is a hate group, whose mission is to eradicate gender-affirming care and whose charter implies that LGBTQ+ individuals are threats to the wellbeing of children.

That designation is easily extrapolated from Michell's digital wake.

Gays Against Groomers was banned by Venmo and PayPal in September – just one day after it was booted from Google.

READ MORE: 'Very dark': Reporter nails Fox News for going right back to hate speech that sparked Colorado massacre

"For months, along with right-wing troll Chaya Raichik, who runs Libs of TikTok, a Twitter account that calls itself Gays Against Groomers has been engaging in what advocates have said are strategies that amount to a stochastic terror campaign, specifically against transgender people," The Advocate reported at the time.

In a written statement to the paper, a spokesperson for PayPal explained that its "policy is not to allow our services to be used for activities that promote hate, violence, or discriminatory intolerance. We base our reviews of accounts on these parameters, taking action when we deem that individuals or organizations have violated this policy.”

Back in June, Twitter user CARP published a thread containing screenshots of Michell's online affiliations, which include "an anti-trans hate account and several well-documented crypto-white supremacists." Michell "also posts content from the hate group and seditious conspiracy Proud Boys, Gavin McInnis, and Murder The Media," CARP revealed, along with examples of Michell, who is Jewish, "promoting well-known antisemites."

Furthermore, "although she's gay she seems to hate LGBTQ who aren't far right, which is most LGBTQ," CARP observed. "She was somehow a #TrumpPride Board Member and did graphic design work for the 2020 RNC Convention."

READ MORE: NBC reporter urges 'come to Jesus moment' for media in wake of Colorado Springs anti-LGBTQ mass shooting

Michell's homophobic behavior has incorporated the right wing's adoption of "groomer" to demean human beings that identify as LGBTQ+. Michell, CARP reasoned, "pretends like the 'groomer' callout is just her defending kids, but gives it all away by just randomly calling an actor a groomer. It's simply a pejorative to demonize people she doesn't like and that's a broad swath of American[s]."

Michell reinforced that reputation during her appearance on Carlson's show.

Michell doubled down on her rhetoric, defending the use of "groomer" and suggesting that the mass shooting that killed five people and injured twenty-five others at Club Q in Colorado Springs, Colorado early Sunday morning – which fell on Transgender Day of Remembrance – was preordained, and that the targeted anti-LGBTQ+ violence will carry on:

Right, I mean, it shouldn't have to be said. But, what is anti-LGBTQ that these people need to understand and what is putting our community in great danger is, you know, claiming that all of us support this and just associating all of us with this. You know, saying that 'groomer' is an anti-LGBTQ slur, that is doing irreparable damage to us as a whole and is putting a really large target on our backs. And, unfortunately, you know, the tragedy that happened in Colorado Springs the other night, uh, you know, it was expected and predictable. Um, we all within Gays Against Groomers saw this coming from a mile away, and sadly, I don't think it's gonna stop until we end this evil agenda that is attacking children.

No quantifiable evidence has determined that LGBTQ+ Americans – especially drag queens – negatively influence kids.

But Michell is not the only voice fanning flames and rationalizing the attempted erasures of LGBTQ+ communities. On Tuesday afternoon, Daily Wire commentator and conspiracy theorist Matt Walsh blamed the Club Q massacre on the victims.

"If it’s causing this much chaos and violence, why do you insist on continuing to do it? If according to you, it’s like putting people’s lives at risk, if the effort to have men cross-dress in front of children is putting people’s lives at risk, why are you still doing it? Is it that important to you?" Walsh pontificated. "Instead of asking why we oppose it so much, we should ask why they support it so much that, according to them, they will keep doing it at the risk of life and limb. Why is it so important to you to cross-dress in front of children? Why is it so important? Why do you need to do it? Why? Is it worth the cost that you claim you’re paying for it?"

Last week, Maryland's Democratic Attorney General Brian Frosh concluded a massive four-year investigation that uncovered a nearly-century-long pattern of perversion committed by roughly thirteen dozen members of the Catholic clergy.

Frosh's probe identified "almost 160 priests who subjected more than 600 children to 'sexual abuse and physical torture' over eighty years," Now This News noted on Tuesday. "The attorney general's office has compiled its filings in a 465-page report, which it asked the Baltimore Circuit Court for permission to release Thursday. State law requires that the office get approval before releasing the report because it contains grand jury information, according to the Baltimore Banner," which broke the bombshell story on Friday.

If Michell and Walsh are genuinely concerned about children, their cause could be better served by them recognizing who the legitimately-suspected perpetrators of harm are.

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: Watch: Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh invoke Martians in wildly inaccurate rant against same-sex marriage

White House reporters rebuked for complaining about not being invited to Naomi Biden's wedding

The day before President Joe Biden's eldest granddaughter Naomi married Peter Neal at the White House on Saturday, November 19th, Press Secretary Karen Jean-Pierre stated that "they have decided to make this wedding private. It is a family event. It is -- and we are going to respect Naomi and Peter's wishes."

Indeed, this is what occurred. The nuptials were a celebration that was kept from the leering eyes of the public. One exception was granted, however, to Vogue reporter Chloe Malle and photographer Norman Jean Roy, who were given exclusive access to the First Family last week for a photo shoot.

That "special digital cover," containing the collection of pictures and interviews with the Bidens, was published on Monday. And it drew the ire of members of the White House Press Corps.

READ MORE: 'Lies of conspiracy and malice': Joe Biden warns of right-wing extremism and its threats to democracy

Bloomberg News White House correspondent Nancy Cook quoted Jean-Pierre in a retweet of Vogue's story, implying that the White House had not been forthright about who would be permitted to attend the wedding.

"There is a photo in the spread of the bride and groom with their wedding cake. Wonder if that was also shot days before? I have no idea either way, just asking," Cook added.

Similarly, Katie Rogers, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, posted that she "had reporting in Oct about Vogue being tapped to cover this and I was waved off. Official explanation is that Vogue wasn’t there the day of. Loophole = the family staged a 'wedding at the WH' shoot beforehand. 'Private' per Jean-Pierre = not for the White House press corps."

CNN White House correspondent Kate Bennett also complained that "they WERE there — the reception photo, the kissing the groom on the White House lawn video, the family photo, them going up the stairs to the residence…"

READ MORE: NBC reporter urges 'come to Jesus moment' for media in wake of Colorado Springs anti-LGBTQ mass shooting

A short while later, Ashley Parker, the senior national political correspondent for The Washington Post, accused the Bidens of dishonesty and equated it with the unending torrent of falsehoods that flowed from former President Donald Trump and his administration.

"I spent four years covering the Trump WH and two years covering the Biden WH. What’s fascinating is that they both lie, albeit in v different ways. Trump team was shameless, whereas Biden team is too cute by half," Parker said.

Reactions to Parker were harsh.

"The prolonged meltdown over Naomi Biden and her husband not inviting the WH Press Corp to their wedding is really something. Just because something occurs at the White House, that doesn't make it public. What's next, demanding the Bidens let you sleep in their bed?" Drew Savicki asked.

"'Joe Biden won't let us film him in the shower, is that a problem for transparency?'" he continued. "I could be wrong here but Naomi Biden and her husband are not government officials. Why should they be obligated to invite the WH Press Corps?"

"I disagree with this political viewpoint. I believe that Trump lying about the winner of the 2020 election is substantive much worse than the Biden White House only inviting select reporters to Naomi Biden's wedding, and that it is irresponsible for reporters to compare the two," said senior Vox correspondent Ian Millhiser. "I do not believe that the fact that I am a journalist entitles me to attend Naomi Biden's wedding."

'It's not up to the White House to decide who covers Naomi Biden's wedding. The Constitution reserves that power for the state legislatures," joked Semafor politics reporter David Weigel

"Are you f’ng kidding me with this?!? Comparing lying about a deadly pandemic, lying about AN ELECTION HE LOST (for starters) is anything related to the private wedding of the President’s granddaughter!!!! Have we learned NOTHING!??!" Jo responded to Parker.

"This is the kind of false equivalence that misleads people," Occupy Democrats Executive Editor Grant Stern wrote next.

"I remain skeptical about your abilities as a journalist," replied BrooklynDad_Defiant!.

"If you believe there’s a comparison between Trump WH and Biden WH when it comes to lying, then you’re a liar," quipped Chidi.

"Let's be honest: DC reporters wanted access to Naomi Biden's wedding to get access to her dad, Hunter," MSNBC columnist Marisa Kabas opined. "Pretending to be mad that vogue did a photoshoot two days earlier and framing it as some conspiracy rings pretty false."

Grace Segers of New Republic tried to offer an explanation.

"I think the frustration here is that press *was* invited to cover the wedding - but select press, in a curated way, and it feels like a microcosm of how the WH press is treated," she tweeted.

But that too was immediately panned.

Cook, Rogers, and Bennett, meanwhile, were not spared the internet's sardonic wrath.

"Of all the things demanding our attention days, the last thing to garner mine is reporters' faux outrage over not being invited to turn a private family celebration into grist for the media mill. I love news, but this isn't it," Qannaq fired back at Rogers.

"Oh good grief. Are you really complaining because the bride and her family didn’t want the WH press corp causing scenes at her wedding?" Catherine pondered.

McKenzie Wilson, the communications director for Data Progress, shared an astute observation.

"It said in the article under the wedding cake photo 'Photographs by Corbin Gurkin,' who must have been their wedding photographer: https://corbingurkin.com," she pointed out on Cook's thread.

SayMaySmith drew an inescapably obvious conclusion.

"The Bidens excluded the White House press corps from the wedding because they didn’t want you shouting questions at the grandfather of the bride the whole time," they said. "And judging by the hissy fit you’re throwing they made the right decision."

READ MORE: Missouri newspaper editorial board shreds GOP for pushing discredited Reagan-era economic theory

'Too pro-Christmas': Fox News brutally mocked for claiming Biden is 'jumping the gun on Christmas'

Over the years, many critics of Fox News and its sister channel Fox Business have mocked the right-wing cable media outlets for claiming that liberals and progressives are carrying out a “War On Christmas.” It’s a claim that’s difficult to back up, as Christmas music, Christmas celebrations and Christmas decorations become ubiquitous in a long list of major U.S. cities that are overwhelmingly Democratic — from Boston and Philadelphia to Seattle to Chicago. Nonetheless, many Fox News and Fox Business hosts have insisted, year after year, that there is a movement among liberals, progressives and Democrats to attack Christmas.

But in 2022, ironically, Fox News is, according to Media Matters’ Matt Gertz, attacking centrist Democratic President Joe Biden for being “too pro-Christmas.”

At 6 PM on Monday, November 21, Fox News announced its “all-American Christmas tree lighting.” But only four later, on far-right host Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show, “The Ingraham Angle,” the following words appeared on the screen: “Biden White House Jumps the Gun on Christmas.”

READ MORE: There really was a 'War on Christmas' — and it came from Christian fundamentalists: religious scholar

In a November 22 tweet, Gertz was quick to point out how badly Fox News was contradicting itself by lighting its Christmas tree on the same day it was attacking the Biden White House for celebrating Christmas too early. And in a separate tweet, Gertz posted, “New Fox News salvo in the War on Christmas is that Joe Biden is too pro-Christmas.”

It didn’t take Twitter users long to point out how ridiculous they throught Fox News was being. Twitter user Mark Doss, @mzzark17, wrote, “First it was the left has a ‘war on Christmas’. Now it’s ‘Whoa!! Hold on Joe. A little too early to be putting up that Christmas tree.’” And @diana_platts wrote, “It's actually fascinating when you think about it. When you string together the Trump stories by MSM, you see corruption, criminality, incitement, etc. When you string together the Biden stories on Fox, you get stuff like he's bringing up Christmas before Thanksgiving.”

Twitter user Tina B. Gibson, @tinabgibby, posted, “Is this a war on Christmas at Fox News?” And Twitter user Terry Futrelle, @tef581, tweeted, “Well, you have to realize that they have 24 hours of hate filled news to get out, each and every day. Content often bites the dust.”

READ MORE: Trump applauds himself for winning the 'War on Christmas' he made up

NBC reporter urges 'come to Jesus moment' for media in wake of Colorado Springs anti-LGBTQ mass shooting

NBC News’ senior reporter Ben Collins is calling for media outlets to have a “come to Jesus moment” – a dose of reality in order to make a major change – in the wake of the Colorado Springs hate crime mass shooting at an LGBTQ nightclub, Club Q, that left five people dead. A clip of his segment is going viral, with many agreeing the media needs to do a better job.

On MSNBC Tuesday morning, Collins, who covers what he calls the “dystopia beat,” meaning extremism, noted he’s been reporting on far-right extremism and its attacks on the LGBTQ community for months, apparently suggesting his articles were a warning.

“I do you want to say though, am I doing something wrong here?” Collins asked rhetorically, as if to suggest another anti-LGBTQ mass shooting hate crime had only been a matter of time.

READ MORE: Iraq Vet Took Down Club Q Gunman by Grabbing Handle on His Armor and a ‘Drag Dancer Stomped on Him With Her High Heels’

“Here are some headlines that I wrote the last six months,” he said, reading them off.

“‘Fueled by parents far right machine anti-LGBTQ threats shut down trans rights and drag events.’ Remember,” Collins said after his voice initially appeared to crack, “there was a drag event happening to Colorado,” at Club Q the night of the mass shooting.

“‘Anti-trans stalkers at Kiwi Farms,’ which is an anti-trans website that stalks people, ‘are chasing one victim around the world. Their list of targets is growing,’ – that was a couple months ago,” Collins added.

“‘Doctors under threat from far right activists for providing trans care.’ ‘Boston Children’s Hospital faces bomb threat after right-wing harassment campaign’ – there were three of those bomb threats. ‘FBI charges Massachusetts woman with Boston Children’s Hospital bomb threats’ – so they found one of the people. ‘At least 20 Republican politicians have claimed that schools are making accommodations for students who identify as cats.’ That was before the midterms.”

READ MORE: ‘This Ad Is Hate’: CNN Guest Shreds Herschel Walker for Anti-Transgender Ad Hours After Club Q Mass Shooting

“Here are three more from my colleagues in the last three weeks,” Collins continued, reading those headlines. “‘As election nears some conservative groups have ramped up anti-trans campaign ads.’ ‘Far right figures appear to be testing Twitter’s boundaries for anti-LGBTQ speech.’ ‘GOP senator targets Tiktok influencer with anti-transgender taunt.'”

After reading the headlines, Collins posed the question important for all journalists.

“And I’m just wondering, what could I have done different? Seriously, as reporters what can we do different? Because there are five dead people in a strip mall – because that was the only place they felt safe, as gay or trans people in this town in Colorado Springs.”

“And I am trying to thread this needle here. I’m trying to say that this is happening. This targeted stuff has real life impacts,” he continued.

READ MORE: Anti-LGBTQ Congressman for Colorado Springs Deluged With Angry Responses Over Club Q Tweet That Doesn’t Say Gay

“And I’m going to fail by the way, I’m going to freak out because it’s happening. Because I wake up and I see that there are five dead bodies. But I think we have to have a come to Jesus moment here, as reporters. Are we more afraid of being on Breitbart for saying that trans people deserve to be alive? Or are we more afraid of the dead people? Because I’m more afraid of the dead people. I don’t want to wake up on a Sunday and see that all these headlines came to fruition.”

On Twitter Collins says this is “an inflection point in this country right now, specifically for reporters.”

Saying, “Thank you, Ben Collins,” Shannon Minter, the Legal Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), commented: “Reporters & media outlets have a responsibility not to lend fuel to dangerous political attacks on vulnerable minorities—including by stories like recent pieces by Reuters & the NYT that deliberately stoke fears & misconceptions about transgender kids.”

Watch the Collins’ clip above, the full MSNBC segment below, or both at this link.


@2022 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.