Help Fight Disinformation About Disinformation: Donate to Reason

Your support makes some of the "riskiest" journalism on the internet possible.

It's not every day you have the opportunity to help fund one of the 10 "riskiest" online news outlets.*

Earlier this year, Reason was absurdly tagged by the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a British organization that aims to steer advertisers away from disreputable websites, as a dangerous disseminator of disinformation. To add insult to injury, the index was published by a group that receives funding from the U.S. State Department through the National Endowment for Democracy. In other words, your tax dollars helped pay for it.

The GDI slapped Reason with its "high-risk" label without pointing to a single error or inaccuracy in our reporting, much less intentional disinformation, while inaccurately characterizing our byline and corrections policies. Senior Editor Robby Soave scored a mini scoop a few days later when he discovered that best-selling author Anne Applebaum, listed as a member of the group's board, actually had no affiliation with it, suggesting that they might want to get their own house in order. 

(Elon Musk called the absurd labeling and mistreatment of Reason "very concerning" in a February tweet, and no matter what else you think about the letter-X-obsessed billionaire, he's absolutely right about that.)

Since Reason enjoys a perfect rating from a competing, and more widely used, rating site—NewsGuard—the whole thing might simply be good for a laugh if the GDI wasn't a shocking misuse of government funds and an attempted end run around the First Amendment. "Reason is one of the smartest, well-edited libertarian-oriented publications and has been for decades," explained HotAir's Ed Morrissey. "I sometimes disagree with their arguments and positions, but I have never read anything that counts as 'disinformation' or dishonesty. If your risk list gives high marks to BuzzFeed for credibility and freaks out at Reason, you've gone way off the rails." 

Reason has a proud tradition of busting hoaxes, questioning orthodoxy, and asking uncomfortable questions about dominant narratives. Our investigative cover story on the Facebook Files further exposed the government's role in ineptly policing what it declared "disinformation." 

As journalist Matt Taibbi said: "Even before the news media business went fully off the rails in recent years, Reason always stood out as a publication unafraid to take unconventional stances or report on controversial issues." 

After a much-covered blast at a Gaza hospital, for example, NBC's Ben Collins uncritically accepted and helped circulate inaccurate claims made by Palestinian authorities. The 2023 Walter Cronkite Award winner and superstar on the disinformation beat morally condemned those who delayed in reporting casualty numbers that were later found to be wildly exaggerated. Reason pushed back, with Soave pointing out why Collins (and others) were wrong.

In a tweet endorsing Reason's coverage, FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver pointed out that Collins has an "unfortunate little habit of constantly spreading disinformation that confirms his political priors." Reporter Josh Barro agreed: "'Disinformation reporter' is a ridiculous construct to begin with—all reporters are supposed to be in the business of reporting facts, but they hold themselves out as special arbiters over the others, and always for the same ideological agenda." 

Guided by our mission, Reason produces careful, thoughtful, and engaging journalism. We strive to be fair and honest. We correct our mistakes. And we are often the only ones asking questions that mainstream outlets are all too happy to ignore. Every day, Reason journalists reenter the fray to check panics with information and analysis, take the powerful to task for their abuses and failures, and make the case for the ideas of liberty. 

If that's dangerous, then we're dangerous. Donate to support Reason, a danger to disinformation panicmongers (and purveyors) everywhere. 

*(Disinformation alert: Technically you do have the opportunity to support Reason every day. But if you do it today, your money will be doubled thanks to a generous donor. So now's the moment to give!)

Comments

[Chumby]

The commentariat pointed out errors that had been reported during the covid hysteria.

[Rob Misek]

While reason might correct glaring black and white technical errors, it makes little effort to correct the errors in logic of its rhetoric which is left to rot in the archives.

Like the commentary here, misinformation disguised as rhetoric with unproven claims and unrefuted denials is avoided like the steaming piles of shit they are.

If you claim something, prove it. If you deny something, refute it or be guilty of misinformation.

[JesseAz]

They have been proven.

The fact you deny primary sourced evidence from testimony, videos, pictures, mass graves, actual historical camps, etc isnt on other people.

[Chumby]

He’s looking for a final solution.

[sarcasmic]

Nardz and Sevo already have a Final Solution to the leftist problem. Yet nobody here except me calls them out on it. Looks like implicit agreement to me.

[Chumby]

Sevo may be hyperbolizing, though Mike Hihn did follow his advice. SNEER

I like Twain’s advice that I don’t wish death on folks, but some obituaries may cause me to smile.

I see Nardz’ comments in the light of the woodchipper-gate situation. In our state, the Mills (D) failed to address credible threats by an armed and govt trained marksman. Those are the ones I care about. Ymmv.

[JesseAz]

On Saturday sarcs past posts were given to him as he continues to complain about others calls to violence. Apparently he already forgot.

[sarcasmic]

Tu quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwi, tuːˈkwoʊkweɪ/;[1] Latin Tū quoque, for "you also") is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack. The Oxford English Dictionary cites John Cooke's 1614 stage play The Cittie Gallant as the earliest known use of the term in the English language.[1]

Form and explanation
The (fallacious) tu quoque argument follows the template (i.e. pattern):[2][dead link]

Person A claims that statement X is true.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore, X is false.

[JesseAz]

You keep proving you dont understand shit even when you look up the definition. Lol.

Your accusations are not arguments you fucking retard.

You literally attack another poster then misuse tu quoque when called out specifically on your hypocrisy. You made no argument.

[sarcasmic]

Tu quoque is literally saying someone is wrong because they're a hypocrite you fucking idiot!

[JesseAz]

What part of you made no argument dont you understand. My post to chumby was an argument calling you a hypocrite dumdum.

[TwilaMiller]

I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com

[Don't look at me!]

Poor sarc, nobody is in his camp.

[JesseAz]

He can't quit jeff.

[Chumby]

He may want to drink jeff’s milkshake, but I’m not sure he’d be given access to it.

[JesseAz]

Not even the emergency milkshake in Jeff's bathroom?

[JesseAz]

Poor sarc. Always just discussing ideas and being attacked for it.

[sarcasmic]

Thank you for proving my point.

[JesseAz]

You have said this twice now. Do you think you made a valid point either time?

The first person to attack another poster this morning was you.

[sarcasmic]

Do you want a tissue?

[JesseAz]

Poor sarc.

[Marshal]

Be serious. We all know sarc doesn’t apply any standard to himself that he judges others by. That’s just crazy talk.

[Marshal]

Note how sarc drags attention away from actual Nazis, thus limiting criticism of them. All so he can pretend people who criticize him are Nazis. What a revealing act (accidentally) demonstrating his priorities.

[TheReEncogitationer]

I now refer to Misek and Nardz as the Nazi Dynamic Duo.

And where have you ever confronted Herr Misek? You, Rev. Artie, and SPB seem nowhere to be found when Herr Misek slithers out like Spaetzle from a greasy pot.

[TheReEncogitationer]

Misek, you magnificent bastard! Chumby's read your book!
🙂
😉

[Rob Misek]

I have refuted what I deny and regardless of your rhetoric neither you nor anyone else has ever refuted what I’ve said.

If you claim to have, prove it with a link and a specific description of whatever you claim was refuted.

You have no excuse not to.

[Don't look at me!]

Fuck off, nazi.

[JesseAz]

Stomping your feet and screaming nuh uh isnt a refutation.

[Chumby]

Stomping or goose stepping?

[JesseAz]

A lil from both i think.

[Rob Misek]

Hahaha

Just like I said. Your rhetorical piles of shit.

None of you have ever refuted anything that I’ve said.

[Chumby]

Your narrative is Göring nowhere.

[TheReEncogitationer]

See, Herr Misek?

As (((Saul Alinsky))) pointed out, humor is an impossible weapon to counteract! And Chumby is turning it into a Ballroom Blitzkrieg!
🙂
😉

Fuck Off, Nazi!

[JesseAz]

Nothing you say is factual.

Per your own standards I just refuted you.

[Rob Misek]

You sure haven’t proven that claim.

[JesseAz]

Ding ding. Neither have you when you claim you refuted all the primary evidence. Finally getting somewhere.

[Rob Misek]

I’ve refuted what I’ve denied and nobody has refuted what I’ve said.

The rhetorical description that you claim as “primary evidence”, photos, paid and coerced testimony and dead bodies isn’t irrefutable proof that a holocaust occurred.

This is what I claim to have proven that nobody has refuted.

Proven and not refuted I have demonstrated that key elements of the holocaust story are both discredited and impossible.

I’ll make it easy for you.

Refute this. You have no excuses.

There are only two possible explanations for why you won’t/can’t.

First, I’ve shared the truth that cannot be refuted.

Second, you’re too stupid to refute what you deny.

Which is it?

The following points refute key elements of the holocaust with logic and science. Truth can’t be refuted.

There has been no objective forensic analysis at any supposed site. There is no physical evidence. Any activity that demonstrates and shares evidence to refute the holocaust is a crime in every nation where it allegedly occurred.

The fact that all evidence that refutes the holocaust is criminal in every nation where it allegedly occurred is especially relevant if you are accepting any evidence at all from those nations.

Refusing to consider evidence is the definition of bias, bigotry and a disregard for justice.

Without objective forensic evidence all we have is a story made up of piecemeal recollections of events from paid and coerced fuckwitnesses.

I refute those stories with correctly applied logic and science.

The crucial event of the story is the cyanide gassing of millions of Jews. That couldn’t have happened as claimed. The story is bullshit.

Jews have published books illustrated with pictures of themselves shirtless dragging piles of gassed bodies from the chambers to cremation ovens.

But cyanide is absorbed through the skin and NOBODY could have survived a single day of such activity much less collecting reparations into their old age reminiscing about it years later.

Those Jews lied.

Anyone who ever saw the naked body of somebody who died from cyanide asphyxiation would NEVER forget the red skin colour. The bodies necessary reaction to being unable to process oxygen.

Not a single surviving fuckwitness ever mentioned it.

Also, no dark cherry red skin discolouration was visible in any supposed photographs of bodies of so-called victims of the holocaust.

The fact is that it can’t be explained it and only bigotry prevents you from recognizing the ONLY logical conclusion.

Not a single fuckwitness testimony or alleged photograph of bodies was of anyone who died from cyanide exposure.

So much for the “evidence” of a holocaust.

And so it goes with every bullshit story told by paid and coerced lying Jews. The facts prove otherwise.

Have you ever heard of the Bletchley park decrypts of the famous German enigma machines? It was credited for turning the tide of the war as allies knew what military actions the Germans were planning.

Only released in the 1980s those translated messages included prison camp information, deaths, transfers and requests for medicines to treat illnesses. The numbers of dead don’t support the holocaust narrative of which there was also no mention of.

Here are some actual enigma decrypts from Bletchley park in 1942 when deaths were at their highest.

Covering the period 3rd Aug. 1942 – 25th Sept. 1942

A further examination is made of Concentration Camp figures; deaths from typhus have reached a very high figure in AUSCHWITZ.

A suspected case of typhus is reported from AUSCHWITZ (223b/42). It is probable that on the 6th August Nachschubkdtr. Russland Mitte requests typhus vaccine for 50 men and spottenfever serum for 20

For the first time returns are given for deaths of prisoners (223b/14,24,43,50): the figures for August are: NIEDERHAGEN 21, AUSCHWITZ 6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women;.

Firstly the number of dead for the month are nowhere near what is necessary to support the holocaust narrative.

Secondly, notable is the concern over typhus deaths and the requests for medical supplies to treat.

Thirdly, are you willing and eager to perform the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe, as the story goes, that Germans were communicating in code about prison camps while talking plainly about their military actions with their top secret enigma machines?

That would require you to really believe that Germany INTENTIONALLY lost the war to cover up the holocaust while ostensibly leaving lying witnesses alive in the prison camps to tell their stories as they retreated.

The contradiction refutes the story.

Let’s not forget another old timey favourite.The story of Babi Yar is a popular lesson in Jewish schools described as the single largest event of the holocaust.

The lesson is that between 30,000 and 100,000 Jews were taken to a ravine in Ukraine where they were killed.

The story is told by one Jewish survivor, Dina Pronicheva, an actress who testified that she was forced to strip naked and marched to the edge of the ravine. When the firing squad shot, she jumped into the ravine and played dead. After being covered by thousands of bodies and tons of earth she dug herself out, unscathed, when the coast was clear and escaped to tell the story.

She is apparently the only person in history to successfully perform a matrix bullet dodge at a firing squad. The soldier aiming point blank at her never noticed her escape. Never walked a few steps to the edge of the ravine to finish her off.

They were stripped naked to leave no evidence. Naked she had no tools to dig herself out from under 30,000 bodies and tons of dirt.

Only after the deed was done, the nazis realized that so many bullet ridden bodies were evidence. Oops, rookie move. So they brought more Jews and millions of cubic feet of firewood to dig them up, cremate them on gravestones and scatter their ashes in surrounding fields.

There has been no forensic investigation at the site. None of the bullets allegedly burned with the bodies have been recovered. Not one shred of physical evidence of this has ever been found.

There are military aerial photographs of the area at the time but they don’t show any evidence of the narrative, no people, no equipment, no firewood, no moved earth, no tracks of any kind.

Simply stating these facts is a crime in Ukraine where the Babi Yar narrative is taught in school.

The numbers of dead from German enigma decrypts does align with Red Cross numbers.

The Red Cross was founded in 1863 with the purpose of protecting the interests of victims of conflicts.

The Red Cross regularly visited all prison camps. It was their job to report the cause of all deaths. They recorded a grand total of 271,000 among all camps for the entire war. It is a matter of record.

The holocaust fairytale requires us to believe that they were so unaware of what might be happening that they completely missed 95% of the victims in prison camps.

AND that they had not so much as an inkling that a holocaust was going on right under their noses even though allied media propaganda was reporting it and it was their sole mission to identify it. Because there is no evidence of any Red Cross document suggesting they did.

Are you performing those feeble mental gymnastics?

Zyklon B is an off the shelf insecticide used for years before and during the war widespread and throughout Europe among other places in Prison camps to delouse clothing and bedding to save lives by preventing deadly typhus. The system employed heating to release cyanide gas, fans to circulate the gas and more to exhaust the chambers to make the de loused articles safe to handle.

Pictures of this equipment and the small de lousing buildings with clothing racks still exist in Prison camps. But no evidence of any gas delivery system has ever been found in the shower houses where the bullshit holocaust allegedly occurred. In fact, the story has changed to that they just threw the heat activated pellets onto the cold drainless floors in rooms full of people.

Such an inefficient method would have taken too long to kill the required number of Jews. The pellets couldn’t be spread evenly in rooms full of people. The cold drainless floors would have delayed the release of cyanide from the pellets that people would have swept away from themselves. Any dead would have released all their bodily fluids and their bodies covering the pellets. Vomit would have been added to the floor prior to entering such a room.

According to the testimony of the so called survivor, the timing entering the chambers immediately, the details shirtless survivor, piles of bodies with unvented cyanide gas pockets in every space between bodies, death from repeated exposure as per testimony would have been necessary, not just possible.

All Jews saying they did that necessarily lied.

According to Martin Gilbert in his book, Holocaust Journey, the gas chambers at Treblinka utilized carbon monoxide from diesel engines. At the Nuremberg trial of the Nazi war criminals, the American government charged that the Jews were murdered at Treblinka in “steam chambers,” not gas chambers.

Gasoline engine exhaust contains about ten times the carbon monoxide than diesel. Diesel exhaust is relatively safe. Even if the Diesel engines were running at their maximum of 500 ppm, death would take several hours. Far too long to support the narrative.

If Germans had used gasoline engines, death would have been in a few minutes. But in the holocaust narrative for treblinka diesel was used even though Germany had plenty of gasoline for their tanks. Nuremberg still recorded that they were “steam chambers”.

Somebody is lying. They weren’t both steam chambers and diesel gas chambers. Which stupid lie is more believable? Does it even matter to you?

The story of gassing Jews began as British propaganda to turn popular opinion against Germany. It was inspired to draw attention away from Jewish Bolshevik war crimes in Russia because that would work against allied propaganda. It also served global Jewish interests to create undeserved sympathy for Jews who had publicly organized boycotts of Germany to drive Germany to war.

There is a documented letter from the head of British propaganda to the head of the war office recommending that they cease the “gassing Jews“ propaganda because there was no evidence for it and if found out would work against their propaganda efforts.

Head of British Psychological Warfare Executive (Propaganda), Victor Cavendish-Bentick in a handwritten note, wrote on Aug 27th, 1943,

“We have had a good run for our money with this gas chamber story we have been putting about, but don’t we run the risk eventually we are going to be found out and when we are found out the collapse of that lie is going to bring the whole of our psychological warfare down with it? So isn’t it rather time now to let it drift off by itself and concentrate on other lines that we are running.”

Public Record Office Document F0371/34551 revealed by Stephen Mitford Goodson, ‘Inside the South African Reserve Bank’.

Jews had been publicly claiming holocausts of 6 million Jews in various nations no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945. Only to coerce sympathy to raise money and provide the ultimate poor Jew victim identity to be milked when required. Like the wastes of skin who fake cancer on go fund me pages.

What’s the probability after being proven lying over 166 times that the 167th claim is true? Better to buy a lottery ticket. Though the bullshiit narrative has been like a lottery bonanza for Jews.

The only thing the bullshit holocaust narrative has in common with WW2 is that they were both the creation of Jews.

These Jewish leaders are admitting it. Are they lying?

They are properly referenced quotes from Jewish leaders demonstrating that they had intended to create and force Germany into WW2.

That kind of evil is absolutely relevant when considering the character required to lie to the world about a holocaust for the 167 th time.

“We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany”. David A Brown, national chairman, united Jewish campaign, 1934.

“The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany …holy war against Hitlers people”

Chaim Weismann, the Zionist leader, 8 September 1939, Jewish chronicle.

The Toronto evening telegram of 26 February 1940 quoted rabbi Maurice l. Perlzweig of the world Jewish Congress as telling a Canadian audience that” The world Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years”.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

OK, asshole, let's go for it.

1. It's not cyanide , it's hydrogen cyanide (HCN) which kills via inhalation. This is from a MSDS on HCN:

Fire fighters should wear a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) with a full face shield in the
pressure demand or positive mode and other protective clothing. Avoid inhalation of material or combustion by-product
fumes.

Health Hazards (Acute and Chronic): Inhalation of low levels of hydrogen cyanide may result in irritation of the nose and
throat, a bitter almond odor on the breath, a burning taste, feeling of constriction of the throat, blotchy skin eruptions of the
face, salivation, nausea with or without vomiting, vertigo, headache, rapid pulse, or palpitations. Respiratory rate and depth
usually increase initially, becoming slow and gasping. Massive doses may result in immediate unconsciousness, often with
convulsions and death (see Section II: “ Hazardous Ingredients”). Eye contact may cause irritation with redness and pain, as
well as superficial keratitis. Hydrogen cyanide may be rapidly absorbed through the skin, with little or no irritating effects.
Absorption of sufficient amounts may cause systemic effects as described for inhalation.

It is highly toxic when inhaled.

2. Carbon Monoxide (CO) was rejected as too inefficient as it took an hour to kill people.

Gas vans were also tried as part of the Euthanasia Program and at the Chelmno Death Camp in Poland. This mode of killing used carbon monoxide exhaust fumes from trucks to murder Jews crammed into the enclosed back area. Stationary gas chambers also were created and carbon monoxide was piped in. These killings took about an hour to complete.

3. The people killed in the gas chambers were unclothed to make off-gassing easier. The crews working in the gas chambers shortly afterward wore full-face respirators to prevent them from dying from any off-gassing and leftover gas.

Sonderkommandos (special work crews forced to work at the gas chambers) wearing gas masks then dragged the bodies from the chamber.

Essentially, your assertions are full shit, Misek.

4. The camps were located in remote areas as the Nazis did not want anyone to know what the hell they were actually doing.

[JesseAz]

And back to square one.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

And back to square one.

Not only is Misek a Nazi, but he's retarded as well (as redundant as those may seem). Moron seems to think that off-gassing HCN from bodies would instantly kill someone, but can't figure out that those same dead would be killed by HCN in the first place. He also is as dumb as a Branch Covidian, not recognizing the significance of full-face respirators. I'm not even going to get into the rest of his shit-screed as it's so fucking idiotic and fraught with errors that even a 5th grader could figure out.

[Rob Misek]

Hahaha

You’re first point admits that cyanide is deadly when absorbed through the skin, which it would necessarily have been if anyone shirtless immediately opened gas chambers doors and dragged piles of fluid covered bodies out all day every day as the fuckwitnesses said they did.

Especially with the story changing to throwing the zyklon b pellets onto cold wet floors where they would slowly release cyanide for hours. The pellets were relatively safe to handle after all. Hahaha

Lying waste of skin Jews.

Your points 2,3 and 4 are simply rhetoric.

You have provided zero irrefutable evidence of a holocaust and you certainly haven’t refuted what I’ve said.

Your attempt was feeble.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

You have refuted nothing. You have been refuted many times over. Do we need to drag your ass to Buchenwald and force you to see for yourself?

[Rob Misek]

You certainly have never proven your claim that I’ve ever been refuted.

Hahaha.

[TheReEncogitationer]

You've done up and done it, Herr Misek!

Like your "Honorary Aryan" friends in Tokyo did 78 years ago almost to this very day, you've awakened The Sleeping Chumby Giant!
🙂
😉
What will your "Aryan Pure Superman" Polylogic otherwise known as delusion do to prevail against his one-two nuke-punch of Punnery?

There is no humor in your worldview and you demonize some of it's greatest proponents, so I say the Groucho Glasses optics look very good for your comedic destruction!

Fuck Off, Nazi!

[Social Justice is neither]

Reason staff are fully on-board with political censorship so long as they can pretend they were just actions of "private companies" instead of acting at the direction of the State. This stance is maintained as politicians publically threatened SM companies with sanctions if they didn't censor as demanded and behold, policies changed to censor as demanded.

[ElvisIsReal]

A+

[JesseAz]

I mean is it really fighting disinformation about disinformation when you defended censorship against actual information under the guise of private companies?

[sarcasmic]

We correct our mistakes.

Doesn’t matter.

[Don't look at me!]

Facts changed!

[JesseAz]

Conspiracy theorist until I change my mind!

[JesseAz]

When did they do so?

[sarcasmic]

When the Twatter Files came out, for example.

But like I said, it doesn't matter. You only acknowledge what furthers your biased narrative and will angrily attack anything that doesn't.

[JesseAz]

They didn’t correct their mistakes. They pivoted as if they never made prior claims. Evidencr, as mentioned below, existed prior to the Twitter files. It was posted in the threads. Like you, Reason ignore it. They never corrected their prior articles. That is not correcting their mistakes. That is ignoring they made mistakes.

What matters is the evidence they were wrong always existed. What matters is the fact you were wrong as well. Even after Twitter files you continued to call people conspiracy theorists and facts changed claiming people who were right were only so by accident. Again, that is not correcting a mistake nor admitting fault.

Also. Poor sarc.

[sarcasmic]

So angry.

[JesseAz]

Your point was completely false. Good work buddy.

[JesseAz]

Lol. You edited your stupid comment after called out. Where is the anger? Where us you admitting you were wrong while the people you hate were right?

[sarcasmic]

So much hate.

[JesseAz]

Where? I laugh at your idiocy. Funnier than your attempts at humor.

Poor sarc.

[Marshal]

Notice that when sarc is proven wrong he shifts their claim to that the other party is angry as if that’s relevant. Isn’t there some phrase describing and argument which shifts from the facts to someone’s behavior? If only I could remember that phrase.

[JesseAz]

Lol. Good point.

[Bowerick Wowbagger]

As others surely will point out, Reason has been awful on this issue. There was no actual reporting or digging into the relationship between FB, Twitter, Alphabet and the gov't. It was an area SCREAMING for a real investigative outlet to stand up. And they never did.

[JesseAz]

It wasn't just demanding an investigation. They ignored the research and evidence many of the commenters posted in the threads. It was a very open secret that numerous other outlets discussed. But those outlets were icky. There were a dozen or more researchers who all presented evidence of government induced censorship. The government was OPEN about using social media to censor and demanding it do so. This site ignored it and instead pushed private companies to justify it. The contracts from government to social media were public domain. The government workers spoke openly about it. All ignored.

[sarcasmic]

This site ignored it and instead pushed private companies to justify it.

Until they didn't. But you ignore that part. Doesn't fit the narrative.

[JesseAz]

They still ignored it retard. They never corrected their past stances. They never even admitted they were wrong. There are zero corrections on their past articles retard.

It isnt libertarian to ignore government abuses until the evidence is overwhelming. They made an active choice to ignore evidence because they didn't like the sites producing it. Literal cognitive bias. Something you represent as well.

[sarcasmic]

You're a little old to be covering your ears and yelling "La la la I can't hear you!"

[JesseAz]

Lol. This is exactly what YOU and the writers here did dumbfuck. There was evidence posted in the threads for years retard.

[sarcasmic]

Attack!!!!

[JesseAz]

Why do you keep editing posts after responses are made buddy?

[sarcasmic]

Why do you keep editing posts after responses are made buddy?

[JesseAz]

Ahh. You've gone full retard. You realized you called yourself out with your pre edited post. Got it.

[JesseAz]

Man a second edit because you said something completely stupid. Lol.

What happened to your post accusing others of trusting narratives over facts buddy? You realize it described you?

[Marshal]

Of course not. This worked similarly to how there mainstream media refused to investigate e Hunter Biden laptop. We all knew it was likely true immediately because the Post was unlikely to have published without undertaking standard journalistic validation procedures. We knew within a few days because they published those and the other discreditation efforts by the mainstream media were easily proven false.

Once the major media realized their discreditation efforts were actually proving the story they ended those efforts immediately. The medias only purpose was to provide as much support for Biden as possible, which this tactic clearly was.

The same was true with Reason and government coercion. Reason, and the rest of their media, knew any effort to prove there was no coercion would in fact prove the opposite. So they refused to investigate.

Now they want to recover as much credibility as they can so they pretend they led the charge. This is like listening to Randi Weingarten talk about leading efforts to reopen schools after Covid.

[ElvisIsReal]

Seriously. It got so bad I literally started to write about it for a living.

[TheReEncogitationer]

There's a whole lot of Misinformation/Disinformation/Malinformation (MDM *Growl!*) that Reason refuses to deal with and address. Please make a list and tell us more.

[MasterThief]

Resign, KMW. You have turned this website away from libertarianism and into another garbage progressive outlet. Your readership constantly calls out blatantly inaccurate information and points out that few arguments are made from libertarian principles. You are libertines. You want the freedom to engage in destructive behavior while ignoring those negative consequences

[sarcasmic]

People on the left think libertarians are Republicans cranked up to eleven, and people on the right think libertarians are hardcore leftists.

They can't both be right.

[Don't look at me!]

But they can both be wrong.

[JesseAz]

Wait. Is this you admitting youre on the left since you call the actual libertarians here trump cultists and conservatives?

[Chumby]

One is left, one is right and as Dlam indicated, they are both incorrect.

[BigT]

Yes, KMW has certainly damaged Reason's reputation by including so much disinformation. But Reason is not alone:

Trust in media at all-time low, distrust at all-time high:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/how-much-do-americans-trust-the-media/#google_vignette

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Help Fight Disinformation About Disinformation: Donate to Reason

I think your money would be better spent sending it to the comment section-- you know, those rabble-rousers who were onto this 'disinformation' schtick way early on.

[ElvisIsReal]

Completely agreed.

[ElvisIsReal]

As somebody actually writing the stories you guys refuse to touch, all I have to say is -- shove your 'risky journalism' somewhere dark and smelly.

[Witch-Burning Nazi]

Help Fight Disinformation About Disinformation: Donate to Reason

Yeah. Who do I donate to if I want to fight Disinformation About Immigration?

[AT]

The GDI slapped Reason with its "high-risk" label without pointing to a single error or inaccuracy in our reporting, much less intentional disinformation

Errors and inaccuracy aren't the only metrics.

Hiding behind, "We're technically correct, even though we're clearly ignoring very pertinent information and/or not bothering to investigate past our technical correctness at the moment" is hardly a bastion of integrity in journalism.

That said, I'll send you $10 right now if you pink slip Emma and/or CJ. Technically it'll be a donation of their salary + $10.