I just saw this story https://www.vice.com/en/article/epn...ivor-qanon-convinced-my-dad-it-was-all-a-hoax which was spawned from this reddit post https://www.reddit.com/r/QAnonCasua...urvived_the_stoneman_douglas_school_shooting/ Pretty heartbreaking story. The kid is one of the survivors of the Stoneman Douglas School shooting. His father has fallen so far down the Qanon rabbit hole that he believes the whole thing was a false flag hoax and that his son is a paid actor.
If it was just the anonymous post, I'd say B, but the idea that Vice would assert that they verified the poster's identity when they hadn't is so much reputational risk for them for extremely minimal gain.
I equate the Q people to the people who believe their ancient Chinese master has mastered the art of force touch/chi disruption/one finger nerve bomb and go full on mental, until someone challenges the guy to a fight and he gets fucking wrecked because that's not how the world works.
Do people still consider Vice as something other than sensationalist garbage? Shane Smith used to do some amazing stuff, but man they have fallen hard.
I still think that they're not just going to publish Enquirer level bullshit, and are doing some degree of real journalism on shit. I think they go after weird shit to differentiate themselves from the MSM, but I don't think they make shit up.
My question is, yes, they say they verified the poster’s ID. Do they ever say they verified his father’s ID, or see if the father is who the son is saying he is? that vice article loaded on my phone once and now I can’t get it to come back. I don’t ask it in a conspiratorial way, or in a “all sides must be presented way,” I just think it would make for more entertaining journalism to show the dad’s crazy. I’d think a full-on Qnut would relish the chance to spout off on Vice.
Maybe, but in terms of reputation, I’m accusing them of putting out content that’s deliberately designed to be stupid, social media clickbait. Their HBO series was (is?) somewhat decent in terms of journalism, but even then they were caught bullshitting some of that content as well (specifically some story about Chicago crime a few years back I think). To each their own I guess, but it’s more or less a shade of what Gawker used to be.
I agree. Their coverage is shit that I normally don't give a shit about. But if they validated this story, then I'm inclined to believe them rather than say "it's BS".
I won’t watch “Vice” or their so-called journalists directly, they’re basically buzzfeed now. Some of their one-off “sponsored” shows are very good though— “Dark Side of the Ring” is only executive produced by them and is an excellent series, largely because none of their people are the showrunners.
I still maintain that some of the first documentaries they did, particularly the Vice Guide to Travel series, are some of the best content they've ever put out.
Oh, yeah. Back when they cared about investigative reporting, Smith’s journey into North Korea (especially at Mayday Stadium) was incredible stuff. Solid news reporting comes down to two things: great timing and interesting/different subjects. Like so:
Yeah, his North Korea doc was amazing. The Liberia one was a journey into Hell. It seems like Vice personnel see themselves as some kind of descendants of Hunter S. Thompson but really they're just as corporately owned as any other organization. The main stakeholders right now aside from Shane Smith are: Disney, A&E, TPG Capital and George Soros.
In retrospect Shane Smith is an insane self important douche. I remember him being on Rogan around the time they had the huge cash infusion from Disney and were starting a full 24 hour network. He came off as a goji berries MLM take over the world huckster. After they expanded they just became a clickbait content creator to support the now massive business. The promise of a millennial based new media empire fucked up worse than Disney fucked up Star Wars.
Washington state has a new use of force/probable cause law for their police. It seems to be working out well: "The Pierce County Sheriff’s Department says it responded to 911 calls reporting shots being fired at a Kohl’s store in Puyallup on Wednesday night and when "deputies arrived on scene they found a young male deceased in the north side of the parking lot." Several people reported seeing a male in a black shirt and black pants running from the shooting and deputies checked the area to see if they could locate anyone matching the description. A K9 officer was on scene within minutes, but because probable cause had not been developed for a particular individual, they decided not to track for the possible suspect since they could not use force to detain him." The murderer is still on the loose.
Or in other words Cops being told they couldn't shoot a person in the back decided that it was too much work to go through a series of steps of appropriate force escalation.
Ok, Mr. Detective. How would you go about finding a person of unspecified race, age or build, wearing common, nondescript clothing? Sounds like they checked the area to see if the shooter was stupid enough to stick around. You don't find them immediately. They detect by digging into the victim's life looking for people with motive, means and opportunity. Check surveillance footage. Check for connection to past crimes through ballistics. That they didn't chase down someone based on a shitty description sounds pretty reasonable and right in line with hiw people have been asking them to conduct their work. Really, what the fuck did they do wrong this time?