Karoline Leavitt @PressSec
·
More fake news from the @AP

1. DOGE doesn’t even have a Facebook page

2. No air traffic controllers nor any professionals who perform safety critical functions were terminated

Tara Copp @TaraCopp
.@FAANews: FAA staff fired over the weekend included personnel that worked radar, landing and navigational aid maintenance, among others. Hundreds were fired, just weeks after a fatal mid-air collision in DC killed 67. One employee said they were harassed on Facebook by @DOGE…
10:21 PM · Feb 17, 2025. //

Chuck Todd @chucktodd
·
Replying to @PressSec @GNHarben and @AP
The report never says DOGE had a facebook page nor does the report say there were air traffic controllers fired. So you are denying facts or accusations that were not reported or made.

Sister Toldjah 💙 @sistertoldjah
·
Classic "our sources told us" trick. But the report never noted that DOGE doesn't have a Facebook group, which is kinda critical information to put in a story where a source is alleging DOGE's Facebook group (which doesn't exist) targeted him. #Journalism
11:43 PM · Feb 17, 2025

Scott Morefield
@SKMorefield
·
Follow
Secretary of State Marco Rubio defends @JDVance's "historic" speech last week in Munich, leaves ABC's Margaret Brennan speechless after she tries to claim that free speech was "weaponized" by the Nazis. Incredible exchange: 👇

3:56 PM · Feb 16, 2025. //

To start, the "investigative news program" did an entire segment on why free speech is bad, fawning over German laws that throw people in jail for posting "disinformation," and be sure to stick around because that comes back into play later in the episode. Here's the CEO of an NGO called "HateAid," an ironic name if I've ever seen one, explaining how free speech must have "boundaries" lest people rely on it to "say anything they want.". //

I wonder why half of Germans might be scared to post their political opinions online. What could possibly cause so many people to live in fear of what they say? Could it be because Germany throws people in jail for speech its officials deem to be "disinformation?". //

In broad terms, I don't think trying to make overpaid government bureaucrats who spent their time dolling out taxpayer money to foreign entities into victims is going to be very effective. Did "60 Minutes" run segments shedding tears for the people who lost their jobs when the same bureaucratic state pushed for the shutting down of the country for COVID-19? Or what about the workers who were left hanging when former President Joe Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline? I could spend all day listing examples.

Now, are you ready for the big twist? In the same episode "60 Minutes" lauded anti-free speech laws in Germany under the guise of policing "disinformation," it turns out they lied about who Drye and Dubard were. It turns out both were not actual USAID employees by contracted consultants, with one being a speechwriter for Samantha Power, the politically appointed head of the agency during the Biden administration. //

So a major news outlet promoted laws that punish the spreading of "disinformation" and then proceeded to spread disinformation for partisan gain. You can't make this stuff up. Truly, CBS News is on another level right now.

When asked about topics such as the Tiananmen Square massacre, persecution of Uyghur Muslims, or Taiwan’s sovereignty, DeepSeek either dodges the question or parrots Beijing’s official rhetoric. This is not a bug—it’s a feature. Unlike Western AI models, which, for all their flaws, still allow for a broader range of discourse, DeepSeek operates within strict ideological parameters. It’s a stark reminder that AI is only as objective as the people—or governments—who control it. //

The question we must ask ourselves is simple: If AI can be programmed to push a state-sponsored narrative in China, what’s stopping corporations, activist organizations, or even Western governments from doing the same?

Don’t think American companies would stop at weighting their algorithms to ensure diversity. Over the past few years, we’ve seen a growing trend of corporations aligning themselves with Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics. This framework prioritizes social justice causes and other politically charged issues, distorting how companies operate. Over the same period of time, many social media companies have taken aggressive steps to suppress content considered “misinformation.”. //

Without transparency and accountability, AI could become the most powerful propaganda tool in human history—capable of filtering search results, rewriting history, and nudging societies toward preordained conclusions. //

This moment demands vigilance. The public must recognize the power AI has over the flow of information and remain skeptical of models that show signs of ideological manipulation. Scrutiny should not be reserved only for AI developed in adversarial nations but also for models created by major tech companies in the United States and Europe. //

DeepSeek has provided a glimpse into a world where AI is used to enforce state-approved narratives. If we fail to confront this issue now, we may wake up in a future where AI doesn’t just provide answers—it decides which questions are even allowed to be asked.

Although much of the buzz around ‘Wicked’ has focused on ‘queering,’ it is the concepts of propaganda and tyranny that drive the film. //

Not everything is hunky-dory in Oz. Here, animals are persecuted for their differences and put in cages to prevent them from learning to speak. Elphaba has a strong sense of justice to speak for the voiceless and decides to visit the one and only Wizard of Oz to fix the problem.

To her dismay, the Wizard (played brilliantly by Jeff Goldblum) is a fraud. Elphaba is invited to his castle to create flying monkeys that will be perfect “spies in the sky.” Scheming together with Morrible, the Wizard tells Elphaba that dissent will not be tolerated.

“When I first got here,” says the Wizard, “there was discord. There was discontent. And back where I come from, everybody knows that the best way to bring folks together is to give them a real good enemy.”

“We’re doing this to keep people safe,” Morrible says, in turn. We’ve heard that one before. Many things have been done “for the security of the state,” and they are never good.

Although slightly bumbling (in a very Jeff Goldblum way), the Wizard is nevertheless manipulative. Goldblum’s Wizard oscillates between a P.T. Barnum figure and a dictator with Morrible at his side. It is Morrible who is responsible for spreading lies about Elphaba. It is Morrible who names her the Wicked Witch and says she must be destroyed. Morrible effectively begins the propaganda campaign against Elphaba, exploiting her physical differences with the intent of crushing her free will.

The people of Oz accept it because they’ve already been living in a society that has kept them artificially happy, as long as they don’t ask questions. They are living in an illusion, in Plato’s cave, and the shadows are their reality. They are weak and would rather blame an external factor for their problems rather than take responsibility for their actions (or lack thereof). In other words, they have made themselves into slaves and require a dictator to exist.

Propaganda is a powerful tool, and we have seen this phenomenon throughout many totalitarian systems, even in soft, shape-shifting totalitarian impulses in the United States. In some ways, the ideological lie becomes worse in nations that fundamentally and foundationally resist tyranny. But it is precisely this contrast between freedom and small acts of tyranny that are insidious. People can be “asleep” through many different means, but it always includes a refusal to see the truth because then one must act. In “Wicked,” Glinda opts for an existential blindfold. The alleged goodness she embodies is nothing more than an affectation.

“Wicked” is not an excellent film. At times, it meanders and is sensory overload by virtue of being a musical. But in the final moments of the film, the larger idea is revealed: What is reality? Do we possess free will to choose truth over a lie?

In the final song, “Defying Gravity,” Elphaba sings that if she’s “flying solo,” then “at least, [she’s] flying free.” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has identified “the simplest, the most accessible key to our liberation” as “a personal nonparticipation in lies!” Elphaba could have chosen to be part of the Wizard’s machine, but that means she would be living by lies.

Mark Zuckerberg told Joe Rogan that Facebook pushed back on the Biden regime’s censorship demands. The Facebook Files say otherwise. //

Zuckerberg purported in his JRE [Joe Rogan Experience] appearance that Facebook resisted Biden administration bids like these. Instead, the Big Tech company’s censors fulfilled Flaherty’s dreams that it would “play ball” by “demoting” posts casting doubts on the Covid-19 jab. Covid content that couldn’t be easily or justifiably removed under Facebook’s terms and conditions would be “contained” and sent to the company’s third-party “fact-checkers” for further false impugnment.

Zuckerberg wants the millions of people who tuned into his conversation with Rogan to believe that Facebook was a heroic middle-man who told off the government when it tried to throttle dissenters. In reality, Facebook was a willing accomplice in the Democrat-fueled war on free speech. No amount of Zuckerberg’s revisionist retelling can erase the evidence that Facebook eagerly participated in the Biden administration’s scheme to silence its political enemies, dissenters, and publications like The Federalist.

Following Mark Zuckerberg’s putative mea culpa for having made Meta complicit in the largest censorship regime in American history, and his vow to restore free expression on his platforms, the CEO made perhaps his most consequential statement of all in an interview with Joe Rogan.

There, after describing the pressure campaign the Biden administration waged against his company to suppress disfavored speech, primarily regarding Covid-19, Zuckerberg told Rogan: “I don’t think that the pushing for social media companies to censor stuff was legal.”

The Meta CEO’s silence as this very issue was being litigated all the way up to the Supreme Court was as deafening then as it is maddening now. But in making this assertion, he has inadvertently highlighted one of the Roberts Court’s gravest derelictions of duty — one that emphasizes the necessity of vigorous executive and legislative actions in defense of our rights, actions like those promised by the Trump administration and some in Congress.

The dereliction of duty came in the Supreme Court’s punting of the case of Murthy v. Missouri, previously known as Missouri v. Biden.

Plaintiffs in the case obtained and marshaled voluminous evidence demonstrating that senior Biden White House officials and federal agencies coerced, cajoled, and colluded directly and indirectly with social media companies to purge disfavored news and views en masse on matters ranging from the Hunter Biden laptop story to election integrity and Covid-19. The defendants did so on ostensible grounds of combatting dangerous “mis-, dis-, and mal-information.” In deputizing non-governmental actors as its speech police, the plaintiffs argued, the feds engaged in a conspiracy to violate the First Amendment by proxy.

The case, alongside congressional investigations and reportage including the “Twitter Files,” helped expose the size, scope, and nature of the censorship-industrial complex. //

The defendants appealed. But Judge Doughty’s counterparts on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld his ruling.

So the feds took their argument to the Supreme Court. There, shockingly, as I observed while attending oral arguments, far too many of the justices showed they held a perversely narrow view of the First Amendment, and they gave substantial deference to the feds that had so imperiled it. Some also seemed remarkably ignorant of the expansive factual record supporting the plaintiffs’ claims.

Last summer, the high court dismissed the plaintiffs’ concerns and Americans’ free speech rights on a technicality. In a 6-3 ruling, the Supremes held that the plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief, refusing to rule on the merits of the case.

Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, rebuked the court for straining to create “new” and “heightened” standards to find that the plaintiffs lacked standing and warned that the court’s refusal to rule on the merits of the case could result in dire consequences.

“[W]e are obligated to tackle the free speech issue that the case presents,” Alito asserted. “The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think.”

The dissent concluded that what transpired in Murthy “was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court’s failure to say so.”

By not ruling that the censorship-industrial complex’s acts were unconstitutional — by avoiding the question entirely — the Supremes signaled that it was open season on free speech in America. //

The courts simply cannot be seen as a reliable backstop for protecting our First Amendment rights against the censorship-industrial complex.

What’s more, if Republicans allow the fed-led censorship regime to persist, there will be no deterrent to Democrat efforts to create analogous regimes going forward, targeting rights beyond those enshrined in the First Amendment.

The government response to Hurricane Helene has been nothing short of horrific. As RedState has been covering, everything that should be functioning normally to help the American people in terms of rescue efforts and assistance has been a colossal failure due to our inept and corrupt government.

Amid all of this failure of government has been an incredible display from private citizens who are lining up to help those in trouble in the affected areas. They're willing to put their time, money, resources, and skills at the disposal of those in need. It truly is a stunning display of humanity.

(READ: The Government's Failure to Help After Helene Goes Far Beyond What the Media Is Willing to Tell You)

But among all of this are reports that there are government officials attempting to halt the people's efforts in various ways. They threaten to arrest helicopter pilots who are rescuing the stranded. Reports that FEMA has told people to stop giving supplies out privately and direct them to FEMA camps have been made.

As former Army Ranger and MMA fighter Tim Kennedy told a local news agency, the government is actively hampering attempts to help. //

A Man Of Memes @RickyDoggin
·
She’s based. She’s 100% correct and you can’t deny it or bust her argument.

Let’s change the status quo. The quickest way to change it is to vote for the person that both sides hate…. Hmmmm, I wonder who that is?

6:25 PM · Oct 3, 2024

Summarized, her point is this.

If the media were to begin accurately reporting on the civilian effort to help the people and how successful it's been, operating on a shoestring budget with supplies gathered here and there, and all without government assistance, then you'd likely start wondering what the point of the government is.

The government wants you to believe that without it, you're entirely vulnerable and at the mercy of everything around you. It wants you to believe that you need it for your protection and survival. To be sure, there are elements of it that should exist for that very reason. Police forces and the military are necessary to maintain safety from both domestic and foreign threats.

However, it's pretty clear that the extraordinary amount of taxpayer dollars that we pay to it in order to keep the country functioning as it should are being wasted continuously. Even with all the billions and billions of dollars it takes from us, it can't seem to prioritize it well enough to be utilized properly. You start to realize you don't need the government as much as you think you do, and before long, you're enthusiastic about shrinking it, giving it less of your money, and reducing the number of people who work there.

This is a nightmare scenario for the government. If you know your own power, it highlights the weakness of the government //

If anything, Helene is a wake-up call. It's a full-on display of the power of the people, and a perfect example of how government should always be small and minimally funded based on basic need. //

Xanthro
33 minutes ago
All this failure is because of the current Administration. CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) is actually part of FEMA and we have been part of search and rescue for years. We are the ones who often train others, as we are volunteers and usually have decades of experience.
When we showed up at a disaster, we often even took lead, because we were there first. CERT is sometimes called the Zero Responders, because we are in the community, we don't need to travel to it.
I noticed a massive change with the snowstorms the San Bernardino Mountains. People were trapped for days and we were not allowed up the mountain, and those who came down the mountain were not allowed back up. People were tricked into coming down the mountain in refill medications and were arrested to prevent them from going back up, all the while their family members died.
While have no direct knowledge of the Maui, it screams the same incompetence.
Nowwe are once again prevent from rescuing people. Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carolina are insanely impacted. FEMA is doing everything they can to thwart rescue and aid.
I'll admit, FEMA was pretty shoddy at time pre-Katrina, but after that they stepped up their game, but all that improvement is gone.
FEMA is the problem, not the solution. //

C. S. P. Schofield
an hour ago
The Progressive Establishment firmly believes in the wonderfullness of Central Planning. They believe in it the way Medieval Aristocrats believed in the Divine Right of Kings. No matter how often it falls down, it is their reason for existing in the first place. And, to be fair (and it hurts to be fair to these weasels) Central Planning has had its victories. The spread of water and sewage systems was planned that way. Such networks are hard to start as private enterprise because the value they impart is diffuse and therefore hard to charge for up front. But the Progressives think EVERYTHING should be centrally planned and controled, and that simply doesn’t work.

The core idea behind our Constitution and Bill of Rights was that government should be a service organization, limited in authority. It was a radical idea in 1789 and 1791 (when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified, respectively), and it has REMAINED a radical idea ever since. Elites do not like the idea of limited government. They do not like the idea that the peasants (that’s us) get to tell them to go climb a tree. So they try to undermine the Constitution every chance they get.

Perhaps you've seen the video of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg going around where he tells citizens to refrain from sending drones into the air, or piloting aircraft in the area where Helene has left a path of destruction.

"There's also some safety issues that come up," said Buttigieg. "For example, temporary flight restrictions to make sure the airspace is clear for any flights or drone activity that might be involved in helping to allow those emergency responders to do their job."

Brandon Morse @TheBrandonMorse
·
This video is the government attempting to stop footage from getting out that shows the extent of their ineptitude and halt civilians help so there’s no contrast to highlight it’s failure. Full stop.

12:26 PM · Oct 3, 2024

The excuse is that you need to keep your drone or aircraft out of the sky in order to allow emergency workers to do their jobs and not complicate matters. That would be a valid thing to suggest... if there was an effective rescue operation going on, but there's not. As I covered in my last VIP article, FEMA is out of disaster relief money because it was spent on illegals.

If you're like me, you probably didn't see this as a federal official attempting to help people. Given that this is the Biden-Harris administration, you probably became suspicious pretty quickly that something else was likely behind Buttigieg's words.

Personally, this feels a lot like a call for censorship, even if it's just an attempt to encourage it through "advice."

If you want to know what the real story on the ground is, the government isn't going to tell you. Their response has been disastrous, and it makes them look awful. The less you see of this disastrous response, the better for them. They can craft their own narrative where they were the ever-present heroes working hard to help victims.

But it would be an egregious lie. The real heroes are the ones out there helping their fellow civilians in any way they can. Private pilots are attempting to rescue stranded victims. Food and water are being delivered where it can be effective, and this is in spite of government disaster groups telling them to stop. //

Maximus Decimus Cassius
19 hours ago
The "authorities" are trying to enforce no-fly zones for everything--helicopters, drones, whatever--to prevent assistance to the stricken. This is beyond treason.

Lets just call it what it is: government sponsored genocide. //

Vigilo
17 hours ago
This is like the Biden regime response to the Maui wild fire. "No cameras allowed". //

Sancho Panza
18 hours ago
The idea of citizens taking direct action to make things better for their communities, neighbors, families and selves has uncomfortable connotations for fascists. They feel it keenly, and instinctively suppress it any way they can.

Harris also once again placed January 6th above 9/11 and the OKC bombing as the “worst attack on our democracy.” //

henrybowman | September 17, 2024 at 8:30 pm
“(Please do not forget the OKC bombing. I get why 9/11 receives the most attention but do not forget the 1995 OKC bombing.)”

When I started out collecting data as a 2A activist in the late ’80s, the largest mass murder on US soil was the Happyland Social Club fire, an arsonist with a jar of gasoline.

Then came Waco.
Then came OKC.
Then came 9/11.
Then came COVID (much less qualifiable, but clearly the record-holder).

In a country with 250 years of history, all this escalation in just 30 years. My God.

You’ll notice that NONE of these mass murders were committed with guns… but at least two of them — the ones that involved housewives and children — were committed by our own government.
Government democide — entirely exclusive of wartime deaths — has killed more humans than all wars combined. //

TargaGTS in reply to henrybowman. | September 17, 2024 at 8:59 pm
I forgot about the Happyland fire…probably because no one in the media brings it up anymore. I would add that the worst school spree murder happened way back in the 1920 or early 1930, the Bath School Massacre, which was also perpetrated entirely by firebombing. Close to 40-dead (mostly children) and another 60(ish) injured. I’m always fearful firebombing might come back into vogue again.

CNN’s Daniel Dale has done the unthinkable. He took aim at @KamalaHQ, the official rapid response page on X for Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. With over 1.3 million followers, the account has a wide reach, and according to Dale, “has made a habit of misleadingly clipping and inaccurately captioning video clips to attack former President Donald Trump.”

The account has been “repeatedly deceptive” and has made “inaccurate comments on multiple occasions,” Dale wrote. And he goes on to detail eight of the account’s most disingenuous posts from the last month.

The problem with all the mockery was that Trump's claim was true, as evidenced by an article from CNN of all places, that had been published the day before the debate, and which detailed Harris' answers to a 2019 ACLU questionnaire: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/08/Harris-ACLU-Candidate-Questionnaire.pdf //

To make matters worse, Free Beacon reporter Joe Gabriel Simonson added on Twitter that "In a subsequent exchange, Glasser’s editor said the New Yorker does not 'see a need to issue a correction.'"

That news headline about presidential candidate Kamala Harris on your Google search results? It may have been written by her campaign.

Harris' team has been launching sponsored posts on Google that link to real news content from various publishers but feature customized headlines and descriptions crafted by her campaign, a practice experts and Google called "common." One sponsored ad that links to NPR’s website features the headline “Harris will Lower Health Costs.” Another that links to the Associated Press reads “VP Harris’s Economic Vision - Lower Costs and Higher Wages.” The advertisements were first reported by Axios.

While these sponsored posts have been used by other campaigns and comply with Google’s policies, some marketing experts worry they could fuel misinformation and distrust in the media. //

Google's ad transparency center shows a number of other publishers featured in Harris ads, including Reuters, Time, CNN, AP, the Independent, the Guardian and USA TODAY.

"We were not aware the Harris campaign was using our content in this manner,” said Lark-Marie Anton, spokesperson for USA TODAY parent company Gannett. “As a news organization, we are committed to ensuring that our stories are shared appropriately, adhering to the highest standards of integrity and accuracy." //

The Harris campaign declined to comment for this story. Donald Trump's campaign did not return a request for comment, but Google's ad transparency center did not show these types of ads from the former president's campaign. //

But even with a sponsored tag, the ads present a “significant ethical concern,” according to Colin Campbell, associate professor of marketing at the University of San Diego.

He said this is especially true when consumers fail to differentiate online ads.

“Many consumers might form opinions based solely on the altered headlines, without ever reading the actual articles,” Campbell said. “Even those who click through and read the articles may feel misled when they notice the discrepancy between the headline and the content, further eroding trust in the media.”

It’s always nice when a member of the establishment media actually gets it. Columnist Megan McArdle wrote an op-ed taking the misinformation/disinformation industry to task for a series of sins that explain why they have not been able to accomplish their objectives.

And what are those objectives?

Attacking former President Donald Trump and the right, of course. //

The reason the misinformation/disinformation industry failed to harm Trump is because it was so obvious that this was their entire mission. Even though they tried to disguise their aims under a veneer of a desire for accuracy, it was evident that they were motivated more by politics than a desire to make sure people are properly informed on the issues.

As McArdle highlighted – the bulk of their “fact-checking” went in only one political direction. It was rare for these intrepid seekers of truth to correct any of the long list of falsehoods coming from the left. It was as if they weren’t even trying to hide their bias. //

Members of the misinformation industry would have been smart to at least pretend to care about debunking false narratives on both sides by also going after folks on the left who propagated falsehoods in public spaces.

But they didn’t. This is why they continue to fail. //

GBenton
13 hours ago
McArdle is blinded by her bigotry toward Trump. Those weren't errors, no. The fact checkers lied.

but she doesn't ask why or connect the dots.

they had to lie in a coordinated conspiracy because Trump was revealing the truth and threatening the status quo, of which McArdle is a beneficiary.

Trump represents real reform and those who hate him most have something to lose if the corrupt status quo ends.

The purpose of fscr checkers is to enable leftist misinformation and hide the truth.

The Kamala Harris campaign has been editing press headlines and putting the fake versions in ads as a way to spread disinformation. That's according to a new report that found multiple instances of Google ads being manipulated without the consent of the various news organizations linked to the false headlines.

Jim VandeHei @JimVandeHei
·
🚨🚨 The Harris campaign has been editing news headlines and descriptions within Google search ads that make it appear as if the Guardian, Reuters, CBS News and other major publishers are on her side, Axios has found.
axios.com
Harris-sponsored Google ads suggest publishers are on her side
3:35 PM · Aug 13, 2024 //

There is no doubt in my mind that this would be a major scandal if the Trump campaign were involved. Could you imagine the screams of "disinformation" and threatened lawsuits from press organizations? It'd be non-stop. Because it's Harris, though, it's no big deal. //

Bonchie @bonchieredstate
·
Yesterday, Sara Fischer of Axios threw a fit on CNN over “disinformation” and Elon Musk allowing Trump to “say whatever he wants.”

Today, she’s hand-waving away the Kamala Harris campaign editing press headlines in ads to spread disinformation.

Incredible.
5:32 PM · Aug 13, 2024

Removed (Banned) Dec 31, 2023
Comment removed

Colin Hunt Dec 31, 2023

"Degrowth has many great ideas that would correct social injustice."

Please explain who is expected to die off for everyone else. Also please explain how you expect this to be enforced. //

Removed (Banned) 22 hrs ago
Comment removed

Colin Hunt 15 hrs ago

Typical ad hominem from people like you trying to avoid the fact that your recommendations will result in more poverty and death in developing nations. And you still refuse to answer the questions put to you.

The trick to developing immunity to misinformation

“The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.” ― Isaac Asimov, 1988 //

You’re probably thinking “it’s just a meme”, but it is illustrative of a wider problem where information is presented in this manner: as if the truth is subjective. I only need to open any social media app to see that ‘subjective truth’ seems to be everywhere, and every day there is new questionable information to think about (this assertion isn’t only anecdotal, but is also supported by research). //

As social psychologist Dr. Sander van der Linden points out in his book Foolproof: Why We Fall for Misinformation and How to Build Immunity, misinformation is not new. Previous large-scale examples of misinformation taking hold in populations include Nazi propaganda, which heavily relied on the printed press, radio and cinema, and misinformation campaigns that have been traced back to Roman times when emperors used messages on coins as a form of mass communication to gain power. //

Many vested interests and those who believe misinformation themselves use these biases to their advantage. If this was a war, I would argue that the other side is winning. Thanks to some of these people being convincing communicators, and using storytelling that plays on these biases to their advantage, they have been able to influence what wider populations believe on multitudinous topics ranging from gene-editing to nuclear energy to degrowth as a solution to climate change (it’s not). //

The greatest irony is that anti-nuclear activists have also been able to convincingly embed their unscientific position within environmentalism, even though nuclear energy is the cleanest and most environmentally friendly energy source available to humankind, with the smallest land footprint of all energy sources.

Slogans and stories are sticky, but they may not be true or helpful. Hence I’ve argued before that catchphrases and slogans used by activists are often convincing and successful, even when they are inaccurate. Stories, however, are essential to communicating scientific matters, and we need more people to tell them.

After all, it’s much easier and faster to respond with “what about the waste?” when I mention nuclear energy, than for me to explain why spent fuel isn’t the problem many people think it is, which takes time and isn’t as catchy or simple as the aphorism “what about the waste?” (I have covered the waste argument in detail in this article.) In my work tackling misinformation, I have honed some of these detailed responses to convey them through catchphrases that have also been popularised, such as “it’s only waste if you waste it” (in reference to being able to recycle spent fuel) and “meanwhile fossil fuel waste is being stored in the Earth’s atmosphere”, which is both true and a sticky idea. //

Although no one has studied it directly, I feel sure that coining and popularising terms like “nuclear saves lives”, “energy is life”, “nuclear energy is clean energy”, and “rethink nuclear” has helped to combat the misinformation we’ve heard about nuclear energy for so long. //

People often ask how I stay calm when countering constant ad hominem attacks, gish-galloping and sometimes outright insults. As Mr Spock once said, “Reverting to name-calling suggests that you are defensive and, therefore, find my opinion valid.” My answer is that I don’t take people’s biases personally - after all, I used to believe misinformation myself. We have all done so at some point in our lives, and we are all susceptible to believing misinformation in the future. While it’s worth learning to identify the few people who hold fundamental beliefs on a topic that simply cannot be changed, to save wasting your time debating them, remember that for most people these messages do have an impact. It took me years to change my mind from being against nuclear energy to being in favour of it, and every person who took the time to dispel the misinformation I believed, and provide better sources for me to read to counter my viewpoints, had an impact on my beliefs.

While it may not seem challenging to you, remember that when you engage with someone on a wedge issue, you are making a worldview-threatening correction. It is no different than learning that the Earth is spherical when you’ve grown up believing that it is flat. ///

Evangelism takes time and repetition.

Unfortunately, when we wrote on Omar backtracking... sorta, Google demonetized our article, claiming that it contained "dangerous or derogatory content." They didn't bother to tell us which line or lines in the piece were problematic; they never do. //

The bottom line is, we reported on a Congresswoman spreading misinformation/propaganda and halfheartedly retracting it, and Google thought that was "dangerous or derogatory content" that ads should not be run on.

When the truth keeps getting out despite our tech overlords' best efforts, their last tool is to starve us and destroy our business by denying us advertising revenue.