I could use an apology and correction from Katie Baker of buzzfeed for her sloppy fake news hit piece, but I doubt it will ever happen.

I was one of the first people to break rathergate but have no formal credit, if I told anyone outside of my family-and if I had clout-maybe I would have that honor instead of buckhead. It just takes one person with research skills to investigate, ask questions, create doubt, and the fake news peddled by the news authority (in that case CBS) starts to unravel. We been dealing with a lying news media for decades, but this "fake news" censorship cult only goes after the little guys who help expose real false news or express alternative views.

Much of the modern social science is a joke. It is the taking of one bad study added onto another bad study that develops a cannon of bad science, and bad social policy. It was bad social policy they desired in the first place, but there are many flaws in their procedures, their collection methods, data omissions, their interpretation, all with an intent to get their biased desired results for social control. These literally become the building blocks for future studies to advance failed social policies. They are social scientist, which likely means they failed at STEM and avoided it at all academic costs. So much of it is like case law without caring too much about reality and repeatability; Even a lawyer is professionally expected to reject reality, and substitute it with the opinions of the highest authority on a subject matter. Just because a human authority declares something to be true, doesn't mean it is. So we get cases like(citations omitted) buck v bell, Roe v wade, obergfell v hodges, spark v stumpman, nixon v fitzgerald, sossamon v texas, hans v liousianna, in re neagle, plessy v fergussen, pirates v dolby, that judicial officers have to accept-even scientifically wrong; see nix v Heddon. One man tried to legally change the value of pi to 3, so he could square a circle. Effectively that is what these news authorities are trying to do to us, through "sciences" that are too stupid and unprofitable to begin with save for children suckling on the taxpayers teats advancing communist policies. The greatest Authority is the axioms created by God, which no man can hope to replace. The greatest danger for mankind is when Man tries to think he can replace God, and by extension tell us what our rights are and are not-or what we can and cannot believe-through force. What these false God news authoritarians want is to turn the general population into robots who accept their database of political ideas as axioms that must be followed no matter what-to make the rejection of these ideals too painful to express their fundamental flaws. We could debate if they expect us to be slaves, cattle to be sacrificed, or domesticated pets. From what I have been through in life, we are to be enslaved cattle who will be sacrificed when we plead for our humanity. They don't want a lesser authority to axiomatically prove the informational database of axioms is corrupt and it and the administrators should be rejected, nor assert their own conscious (either through a belief in God or otherwise) to refrain from engaging in sin, nor to assert our own humanity and human needs. Our own humanity means nothing compared to their agenda which they call science. If you dare question them, you are "anti-science" and thus attacking "science". It is all propaganda, but in the end they actually believe they are God.
Many states have in their constitution a right of conscience to protect their beliefs [implied religious], who are the news authorities to violate said natural rights. The phenomena of the little guy breaking the msm narrative is increasingly common; the truth is out there; even if it isn't the whole truth there are giant nuggets of information that casts substantial doubts about the information we are given by the news authoritarians. Not too long ago people were singing, dancing, and worshiping Dr. Fauci. I was here on hive early last year saying we needed to investigate him, Daszak, and USAID early on based upon academic papers, and sources of funding, and USAID nefarious history. Since then, internal emails have been produced through FOIAs showing Fauci's deceit and perjury, others have caught Daszak's conflict of interest on the WHO. Even Fauci has come out declaring an attack on him is an attack on science-illustrating his narcissistic God Complex. A God complex that at one point rose to the level when he justified risking a pandemic to carry out his research. https://nypost.com/2021/05/28/fauci-once-argued-viral-experiments-worth-the-risk-of-pandemic/ . Before then (maybe jan-early feb 2020) I made a blog expressing concern about the reported lethality of covid19 and suggesting people prepare. We stocked up immediately just in case, while months later when others stocked up the shelves where bare-and seed catalogs sold out too. Meanwhile the news authoritarians and others were saying any defensive ideas (like banning travel from China) was racist/xenophobic, and encouraging people to attend Chinese new years to prove otherwise and to hug Asians to show they weren't racists. I am sure a certain white guy from Atlanta the media called racists loved to hug Asian women and then some until he snapped, but the democrats,their media, and their NPCs were the earliest known super spreaders and likely deadlier than he was. It's funny that the Left wants to declare themselves as always right, even when they are deadly wrong. Months later, we are just expected to forget how deadly wrong they were-because no one in the media wants to report it and remind us of it. The news authoritarians main goal is to say only the left-wing narrative is right else its the red guard treatment for you, but people aren't forgetting-they just don't want to go to the gulag. No matter how much the left wants to claim such authorities don't exist no matter how far etched it is in peoples memories: Old newspapers, civil/criminal/probate dockets, scientific papers, the speakers own in print statements, etc, all show that claim is a lie. The news authority is getting so bad that satirical websites they fact check, like the babylon bee, are proving to be more accurate than the accepted news of the news authority. And here they come for us on little old hive, after Justin Sun's failure to steal the technology from us, which stores things permanently, telling us to shut up.

The news authoritarians response is increasingly locking people up without a trial without a bond, denying people the ability to travel to express their ideas, abolishing their ability to do banking, getting people fired and permanently cancelled, and humiliating people who don't agree with them. It is a private sector social credit score serving the democratic party, modeled after the Chinese Communist Party. The democrats aren't able to debunk better ideas, dubbing things "fake news" is just their latest Lilithian screeching that any axiom they disagree with as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc,etc.

If the news authoritarians had any better ideas, they might try to offer them instead of shouting down ideas that they don't like. But it is clear that the news authoritarians are against the ideals of Oliver Wendall Holmes [who inspired Sherlock Holmes surname]. Ahem, the pontificating news authoritarians are against any private detective work, wanting us to leave it to the news "professionals"....in a country that has the lowest level of media trust trust in the world. At the core what these news authoritarians want, trying to shut everyone down for "fake news", is to turn us into one giant penal colony with a hive mind [no pun intended]. One of the observable features of the penitentiary system when it was established was in recognizing that in cutting off the ability of people to communicate with others, so a group of 30 wardens could control 900 dangerous convicts working in a quarry. If only one person was to share a nugget of truth, then they could organize and use reason and break free of these control mechanisms. The concept is actually much older; when white slave owners didn't want their black slaves to become literate. It was their response to Stono rebellion when Black slaves massacred their owners and tried to march en route to freedom in Florida shouting liberty.

Photo by Henry of Saussure Copeland (CC BY-NC 2.0)

See also
Alexis D'tocqueville, on the penitentiary system
https://www.google.com/books/edition/On_the_Penitentiary_System_in_the_United/zas9AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=of+the+penitentiary+system&printsec=frontcover

They intentionally denied blacks speech and reason, the basis for what separated man from animals. Then, of course, legally prevented them from being humans. Speech, even the expression of bad ideas, is an essential component to liberty. The below case involved obscenity-which is not protected speech. To digress: It is strange that the censors goes after those whose ideas they disagree with on hive, but not after the pronographers. We can assume that the news authoritarians are just coomers, who have no loving spouse at home to care for, and no kids and therefore no sense of duty to preserve liberty for their posterity. If they happen to have a spouse at home, then they certainly benefited from the erroneous obergfell ruling at the detriment of the productive class.

"If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch. Our whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds."
Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/557/#tab-opinion-1947939

'Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offences of Britain, and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, “Come, come, we shall be friends again, for all this.” But examine the passions and feelings of mankind, Bring the doctrine of reconciliation to the touchstone of nature, and then tell me, whether you can hereafter love, honour, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? If you cannot do all these, then are you only deceiving yourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin upon posterity. '
Thomas Paine, Common sense
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/147/147-h/147-h.htm

A deep dive might have taken years...decades ago. Today much of the information is at our finger tips, not on some microfiche in a library some 500 miles away, nor from personally visiting and interviewing a witness from 3000 miles away when we can skype or zoom today. Just about anything is literally at our fingertips. The vast breadth of the information available isn't understood by many, and I suspect the news authoritarians don't understand any of this; They are so used to their news being fed by marketers, politicians, shysters, and attorneys, and not doing any actual work. I seen this personally by the "professionals" who don't do the tiniest bit of research. Furthermore, many users failed to protect their privacy or privacy considerations wasn't much of an issue 30+ years ago until everything became digitized. So that newspaper essay they wrote 40 years ago, can easily be found on a search engine. And that email address, username, or profile pic can easily be searched. Whether it is an army of one with adequate skills, or an army of 4chan volunteers who can perform amazing feats with little initial information, we are much better at digging for information than people with [worthless] journalism degrees. Maybe they developed better grammatical skills as a journalist than say a coder, mathematician, or engineer, but 99% of them are still far beneath us in terms of ability.

I doubt it is jealousy that some small fry could break a big story faster than the media, where the small fry is some anonymous user who is unlikely to fear-but is not immune from-a libel suit. It could be a bunch of click bait media elitist from buzzfeed, gawker, huffpo, conde nash, etc who fear they could lose their job when most never made a profit to begin with and know how fragile their worthless jobs are-but I doubt it. I suspect is is more about political ambitions, and specifically to imprison in the manner the penitentiary system was set up so a few could control the many.

Instead there are nuggets of truths everywhere. Some of these nuggets are not so flattering to certain politician ideologies/ambitions/actors. Some of these nuggets may prove to be unfruitful except to create discussion or show hypocrisy/contradictions; some of these nuggets may lead to more nuggets, which ultimately undermines what the news authoritarians declares are truth. We the people have the ability to reach our own conclusions, and escape the bucket of crabs. Life is all about decisions, good or bad. Harming others is harmful. Having a bad idea is in itself harmless. Judging from what I observed about real eco-facist neo-nazi's (socialist), the main stream left has censored these leftists to the point where it might be impossible to rehabilitate them-and are actively doing all they can to boost both their roster and their passions. The more the news authorities throw people into the gutter, they are just going to make them that much more extreme with violent anger.

We understand that the news authority aren't well read-they more often are likely to see/create a photo and write a story around it than to report the news. A journalist should learn the first amendment in intricate detail, less he finds himself gagged and paying attorney(s) upwards of one thousand dollars an hour.

"In his famous treatise on constitutional law, Thomas Cooley, Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court and Professor of Law at the University's Law School, came out as an early and forceful proponent of an expansive interpretation of the First Amendment. He reasoned that even if speech

exceed[s] all the proper bounds of moderation, the consolation must be that the evil likely to spring from the violent discussion will probably be less, and its correction by public sentiment more speedy, than if the terrors of the law were brought to bear to prevent the discussion."

Doe v. University of Michigan, 721 F. Supp. 852 (E.D. Mich. 1989)
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/721/852/1419700/

But, from my readings on case law, it is clear that the left knowingly takes these risks. They know censorship causes people to become violent; They want people to become violent as to enjoin more speakers. They want to enjoin more [opposing political] speakers as to gain a monopoly on all political expression and ultimately to enslave humanity itself.