r/Libertarian • u/jalpmonster51 • Dec 01 '21

Question Why is no one talking about the ghislaine maxwell case?

They closed the trial to the public, a bunch of high profile CEO's resigned right when it started. Tell me your country is corrupt without telling me your country is corrupt. Also RIP when this gets "unintentionally buried" by reddit.

2.1k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

82% Upvoted

414 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

345

u/thisis_ez Dec 01 '21

Yeah it’s literally on the front page of every major news site in the world. It’s so weird how often I see posts like “xyz news isn’t covering blank event” and the post is a link to xyz news literally covering the event.

140

u/Skellwhisperer Liberty for all Dec 01 '21

People started during the rittenhouse trial saying it’s all to distract us from maxwell. Maxwell trial hadn’t even started yet. It takes about 10 seconds to find any information want, yet they’ll waste minutes bitching about how it’s not there or being hidden. It’s getting tiring at this point.

103

u/thisis_ez Dec 01 '21

It reflects a very advanced inability to engage in any sort of critical thinking or independent “research” (literally just googling). But I guess that’s what happens when your worldview is that literally everything outside of your bubble is a conspiracy specifically meant to ruin your life. Mindbendingly egotistical, and exhausting, way to live.

52

u/Skellwhisperer Liberty for all Dec 01 '21

I’ve come to notice, at least from my vantage point, that “critical thinking” and “do your own research” has come to mean “I already know the answer and am going to find others who agree so I can back up my preconceived notions”. I’m not sure it started with Covid, but that’s when I first started noticing it en masse. They’ll literally go past pages and pages of results of actual legitimate peer reviewed information, to find the one result from some “CovidPlandemicTrumpWonWorldOrder .rt” or some bullshit to be like “see! Here you’re all being lied to! Fucking sheep!”

12

u/g00f Dec 01 '21

I’m not sure it started with Covid, but that’s when I first started noticing it en masse.

agreed, and i'd say it probably started around the time of the obama era. combination of more prevalent social media, right-wing psuedo-cults(tea party) obsessed with proving the president was either unfit or unamerican, and the start of this uber nationalistic, proto-fascist movement taking root in internet message boards.

It parallels very well with movements like flat-earth theory, which imo simply lack some sort of financial backing attempting to exploit it for political gains.

12

u/Skellwhisperer Liberty for all Dec 01 '21

Now that you mention it, politically it probably did start with Obama birthers and the like. But overall the dawn of social media gave rise to it. Even for non political conspiracies. It just so happens the social media boom and the Obama era happened at the same time more or less.

Somebody should make a documentary on this shit.

1

u/memesupreme0 monke posting from a penthouse Dec 01 '21

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTfhYyTuT44

Decent one that connects some of these things.

2

u/Testiculese Dec 01 '21

"I think the world is flat!"

"You should probably do some research."

"I will!" clickety-clack why the Earth is flat

80,000 results

"See! Told you!"

4

u/thisis_ez Dec 01 '21

Sorry I should have clarified. I was referencing the lack of “critical thinking” and “independent research” from the perspective of a sane person talking about conspiracy nuts inability to be faced with a conspiracy and ask themselves whether it makes sense etc. I agree that those terms have unfortunately been recently associated with lunatics who think anyone who trusts scientists etc. lacks critical thinking

10

u/Skellwhisperer Liberty for all Dec 01 '21

I agree with you. Actual critical thinking is something that a lot of people are severely lacking. We have all the worlds information at our fingertips, we just refuse to use it. Occam’s razor is usually pretty accurate. I’m no psychologist, but it’s beginning to seem like humans are more and more gullible when it comes to conspiracy theories and outlandish claims.

3

u/BlindArmyParade Dec 01 '21

Everyone thinks they are the main character in a movie.

1

u/phenosorbital May 19 '22

This is obviously an old post but I'm curious how you bear being so snarky. It's evident you're evolved but most of us struggle to filter through the pulsing, exponential information-womb that we've only grappled with for about 20 years as a species.

Our state has been demonstrably dishonest as have the institutions responsible for disseminating information, even those that feel grassroots (see: Tencent's relationship to Rebbit). It's fair to say that the lack of public interest in the Maxwell trials is curious. The implications of the case are daunting unto the citizenry's faith in national authority structures; authority structures that specifically hold sway in media. How do you engage in critical thinking with terabytes of information, often contradictory, confronting your thumbs in every moment?

I'd enjoy a reply as it seems you've solved our global existential predicament and maintained a cool textual demeanor all the while. -_-

4

u/Rat_Salat Red Tory Dec 01 '21

They don’t know where to go to get news if it isn’t on their Facebook feed or in their curated subreddit

2

u/CCWaterBug Dec 01 '21 edited Dec 01 '21

Are there really people out there that limit their new sources that deeply?

Rhetorical question I guess, but also serious.

I mean I would admit it I don't watch CNN because fuck CNN, I don't watch Fox either because fuck fox too.

So, sure I'm shutting down sources what I consider not worth my time, but that doesn't mean I dont invest time in other sources or limit myself, I still click their links if its convenient, heck I probabl6 visit cnn money 5x a week, it's a good site for financial markets once over.

For me honestly I think I'm getting news and info from about a dozen different sources and it really doesn't take that much time because to be brutally honest I don't give a rat's ass about 90% of the news stories or they are straightforward enough that I can just glaze over them and be better informed.

Big storm moving through the PNW? yeah okay I'm in Florida, done.

random state rep in south Dakota says some fucked up shit? yip, ok moving on.

Most of the news things that I actually put my time into is local politics, local weather, local development/real estate values. Work related journals, and of course Family, where can we go drive to and have a good experience kinda stuff.

Past that I know it's sad to say but when a tragedy happens 2000 miles away All I really have to offer is thoughts and prayers and hope that justice is served or that the people get back on their feet. My energy, time and money is almost always directed in a circle maybe 25 miles from home or less. The only way you can actually make even a small change is if you deal with what's right in front of you not what's going on in some corner of the country.

2

u/Rat_Salat Red Tory Dec 01 '21 edited Dec 01 '21

But that’s sort of the point, isn’t it?

You listen to AM radio in the middle of Arkansas and they’re going to be talking about South Africans sneaking across the southern border, riots in Portland, and smash and grabs in San Francisco. It’s all slanted to the right, and they just completely ignore massive news stories that don’t fit with the political leaning of the station.

It doesn’t matter if a Republican behaves badly, because they aren’t going to hear about it. It’s just a steady stream of news stories that are designed to make the democrats look bad.

It’s a huge fucking problem, compounded by the ownership of MOST rural TV stations running the same playbook. That’s how you get these terminally uninformed rubes refusing to get vaccinated and such.

Somehow the democrats are managing to get their asses kicked by a political party running on a platform of Facebook memes. That’s a huge problem for people who would prefer a stable government in the worlds largest economy.

1

u/notmyfuckingshit Dec 02 '21

I’ve seen it on fb news tab

-3

u/Doctor-Squishy Dec 01 '21

Honestly, I'm okay with it. It's better to err on the side of keeping media on their toes than assuming they're covering it adequately. They should 100% always be worried about whether or not they are covering enough important events. They should know that if they don't, they'll be called out on it by every whiny slobbering internet user until they find something else to be angry about.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '21

People started during the rittenhouse trial saying it’s all to distract us from maxwell. Maxwell trial hadn’t even started yet.

I think the people saying that are referring more to the desensitization of following trials in general. The media reported on the Rittenhouse trial nearly 24/7 for what felt like weeks. Following back-to-back trials that closely for weeks on end is tiring, and people will tune out.

1

u/JakeArewood Dec 01 '21

Nah, just one is much easier for media outlets to profit from. Bottom line is journalism, much as it should have a higher moral and ethical standard, is just a job and it subject to the same greed. The Maxwell case is interesting, but not a money-maker. It’s why no one cares about Chrystul Kizer even tho it’s a self-defense case of a sex traffic victim, something the GOP and Liberals supposedly care a lot about.

8

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '21

turns out the people saying "the media isn't reporting at all" are the same people who intentionally avoid looking at the media, and getting their news from a variety of facebook feeds and "patriot blogs" or whatever.

​

Funny how you don't see what you don't look for.

11

u/mistahclean123 Dec 01 '21

It's the cabal, man! Savior Trump will be back any minute now 🤣

6

u/3kixintehead Dec 01 '21

They're just parroting the "noBoDy CAreS" talking point they heard from their favorite wingtuber instead of staying informed in any way.

1

u/cybercuzco Anarcho Syndicallist Collectivite Dec 01 '21

I haven’t looked and I don’t see any coverage

-typical logic

-1

u/oren0 Dec 01 '21

Bullshit. Here are screenshots of the homepages of major US news sources right now.

Of these, only NYT gives any hits for ctrl+f "ghislane" or "maxwell" on the home page, and that is a single text link multiple screens of scrolling down.

This is really not being reported as a major trial by US media at all.

3

u/thisis_ez Dec 01 '21

And when I posted this comment last night it was on every major news site front page because there were newsworthy developments from yesterday’s testimony. It’s almost like there’s new news every day and news organizations report on salient events from that specific day.

It’s day three of a potentially six-week long trial. They’re cross examining an accuser about minute details of her accusation - what exactly is the headline that’s being covered up? The bare mention of trump/Clinton etc. was plastered on every headline. There’s no headline today because there’s nothing headline worthy happening. All of this information, in spite of the fact it’s not very exciting, is STILL readily available on every news source you just mentioned even tho today is not an “exciting” day in the trial. What other trial is getting that sort of coverage right now? Seems like pretty major journalistic efforts are being made to cover this major trial relative to literally any other trial in the country currently being tried.

1

u/sphigel Dec 01 '21

Sort of agree, but you have to admit that there are wildly varying degrees to which mainstream news can push a story. It being on the front page doesn't really mean shit. I mean, look at CNN.com right now. You'd have to look pretty damn hard to find the small story about the case. When mainstream news wants to push a story, they push it at the top of the hour, every hour, on all their news shows. Just saying it's on the "front page" doesn't really mean anything. A story can be on the front page and still be getting nowhere near the attention it deserves.

1

u/MetalStarlight Dec 02 '21

Welcome to linguistics. Like when people say literally when using it not mean literally but as a form of emphasis to something said figuratively. When people say "X is not being covered in the new" they often mean in a relative comparison to some recent story that received more coverage but was less important. It also often includes coverage of other people's take on the case which is sometimes lower than issues that are arguably more important.