I genuinely went to read this in good faith since it's The Intercept (I know it's not great, but it's not CNN) but decided to do a quick text search for Zenz just to make sure. And of course, the whole fucking thing is full of Zenz.

This is just ridiculous at this point. I really don't want to be a genocide-denier if there is actually one happening, but for fuck's sake this is just ridiculous, LET ME SEE ONE REPORT ON THIS WITHOUT ZENZ ALL OVER IT.

  • FireAxel [he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    It might, that's the fucked up part. The Intercept incorporating Zenz in their reporting just muddles the whole fucking thing. If it ends up somehow being proven that there was a genocide, the fact that people didn't believe it isn't on us, it's on these fucking assholes for constantly including Zenz in their shit.

    If there was a story about something bad happening in the US, and every article's source about the story was Alex Jones -- people would rightfully dismiss it immediately. And you wouldn't blame them -- you'd blame the media for whipping shit all over their reporting by including Alex Jones.

    • p_sharikov [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      For months I've had this nagging question in the back of my mind. "Why would the media pick a weirdo like Zenz?" I mean, there are more serious academics saying similar stuff. What's the benefit to focusing on Zenz?

      I think I've finally settled on an answer.

      It makes it easier to paint the left, and critics of the anti-China stories in general, as genocide deniers. It's actually easier than if they used a better source, because the criticisms of Zenz are going to sound less "nuanced" and that's all libs care about. They're not going to look into it, they're just going to go, "Leftists keep calling Zenz a complete lying bastard and the media says they're genocide deniers, so that checks out". Zenz is fucking bait for critics. The media knows they're going to be doing some heavy-handed consent-manufacturing for the foreseeable future, so they're just diving right in. They're not worried about it biting them later because that's not what matters for the next couple years of anti-China propaganda.

      I don't know if any of that is actually what they're thinking or if there's a more mundane reason for Zenz, but it sounds way more plausible than I'd like.

      • garbology [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        there’s a more mundane reason for Zenz

        Journalists are working under a deadline and Zenz content is easy, everywhere, and uncontroversial in mainstream circles. Why not include it to pad out your article?

    • grisbajskulor [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Alex Jones, or honestly also basically any other right-of-center journalist, if we're talking democrat-related issues. Like just look at the fucking Hunter Biden saga and the mass censorship around it.