Rolling Stone posts panicked article about "QAnon", citing specific members here, due to connecting dots between Beatles, Crowley, Child Sacrifice, & the Tavistock Institute. In an effort to disprove us, they managed to do the opposite and just spread research to the normies. We Are The News Now.
(www.rollingstone.com)
WE ARE THE NEWS
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (207)
sorted by:
I would have to disagree.
Anons work for free. Better put, paytriots are no different than the MSM. Paid infotainment by and for the consumer.
Anons don’t make TV shows and podcasts that come out on a weekly or even daily schedule that you watch as entertainment. Once someone is doing that, selling ads or taking donations from your viewers does not seem unreasonable to me. They are creating a product that you are willingly paying for! Also, many of these people put their products out for free and only ask that you try to support their sponsors. Flecca’s Talks for example prioritizes America First, Made in USA advertisers, which is something we advocate here all the time. Beyond that, their podcast is free and if you want to help them out, they have a bonus hour behind a paywall in addition to their regular weekly show. They also sell merch but you are under no obligation to buy it. What is the problem here?
That's my point. PAYtriots while seemingly good, are ultimately bad in most cases.
From misinfo to disinfo to outright MMM assets, they provide more harm than good.
Naturally, I 100% support capitalism.
However, once you create a product and sell it the primary goal is to what? Make money. Period. Anything else will come secondary if said product is your livilhood.
Nothing wrong with that. But... When we're talking about infotainment media, and the primary goal is monetary then the truth automatically becomes secondary, tertiary, or even more scaled back in priority.
The MSM gives drops of truth to the normies between all the lies. What would suggest that alt media pundits do otherwise? I'm against all forms of PAYtriot newe, it simply cant be trusted the same as any MSM outlet.
Among my other points about many of these PAYtriot alt media sources giving anons complete bunk like what's illustrated in the RS article or how several have been outed as MMM... Theres the whole human susceptibility to greed even if they are squeaky clean. So again, once these alt streamers monetise their production that's the primary reason they are doing it. The truth and research become secondary.
The whole argument of whether making money or not for producing content is a bit moot IMO. the ratio of ethically/morally good streamer vs corrupt/controlled bad streamer is insignificant. Do you check youe eggs before purchase? Do you purposefully choose to buy a dozen if even one is cracked or rotten?