Wincing at ambiguity & the irrelevant advocate

Posted: September 8, 2013 in "Real" Monsters

Zillamod –  Competitors and naysayers alike love to slip me in the bag with unproven consipiracy claimants.  They can try, but my facts usually stand up to the legal and reporting punch tests.  After, some lazy editor with a large online subscription base will scoop it.  And thats when I hate my job. Instead of working with me as a stringer or as a researcher for leads, these publications will put me off.  They’ll give an easy job to one of their buddies with kids.   They will never copp to “biased news from the advocate source”, but this is how daily content is laundered.  Its a cheap little way to get the milk for free and mulch the little guy as news competition.   2 for one win-win if you’re corporate news.

All bitterness and grumbling aside, I owe a lot to the 9-11 truth movement in hindsight.  However, it just won’t cover the tolerance of misinformation, the love of darkness and ambiguity in the conspiracy news weeds.

This is  an e-mail I wrote to a dear old friend today about one of literally hundreds of unprovable conspiracy news/advocacy sites addressing the lost children amid mind control programs.  I am not that different in discriminating news holes that say one thing and then don’t committ to content proofs or subject themselves to a fact check in that it pisses me off for lack of real facts.  For instance, if you say that one of the  5 royal families is responsible for a massive taxpayer funded pedophile ring, COMMITT and bring some facts or legal casework to the table. Otherwise, please, just STFU.

The question was : “Is this controverted or missive?”

Here was my answer….  Spoiler alert: the tone is a little irritated.

Do you ever get the sense that this type of information isn’t necessarily hidden, so much as it is these are the type of issues people really do not want to expose themselves to due to the negativity?  Surveillance abuses we can deal with. They are cold and impersonal and done by an algorithm.  Its still very dangerous and could degenerate into sifting the entire public into categorical identity slots to be ground down.  That’s not so much what I mean. 
It’s almost like you have to go hunting for this other stuff.  Meaning, if you have the stomach for criminal defense case work, a lot of times one can look at this stuff objectively, with an intellectual eye.  
However, most people don’t want any part of the cult of the Mother Devouring and her cannibal worshipper children, when it’s real.  That’s kind of the space this stuff is in. Locked cages. Atrocities.  Sex Abuse. Ambiguity where people manipulate comfort levels for kicks. 
Not into it.  I wrote a blog a while ago indicating that this content is not the space where most normative people live. Even if say, 1 : 25 has some sort of deep strange junk they are dealing with directly.  To frame it better, think of how you would promote or increase public awareness about certain mental illnesses.  That’s a place people don’t want to go.
You could, however, reasonably argue that it is place where they will go willingly, so long as it is not connected to this reality.  That’s why there are horror films like Insidious and Insidious 2 and the Saw series, Hostel etc.  An indirect confrontation with these realities is actually a way of coping for people.
I’m not an anti-semite. I’m not a racist.  I’m not into castigating an entire family of people because their ancestors made a lot of insane mistakes.  I’m live and let live. I have an open mind, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have filters on to keep out the crap or that I don’t see the truth.  You know that I do.  
If someone does something wrong, worthy of prosecution it needs to be made plain, with a legitimate direction. My general complaint with a lot of conspiracy media, as you well know, is that these people sit around and will binge watch 9 hours of unclear, unsupported alien conspiracy documentaries with a whole range of rape and clandestine programming garbage.  Its not clear.  It has no direction. And they revel and obssess on it. And when they try to campaign on it, it is just the worst job in the world.  Its even worse a fate for the plaintiffs. The possibility is so high their personal pain is about to be really exploited and ridiculed for being in the hands of idiots who do NOT care about carriage of fact.
Their advocates are not connected to reality. They are connected to shitty reporting and misinformation covered in a lot of toxic angry emoting. People get the impression that there is a love of the darkness and the vagueries and enough ambiguity, that if {some self-important person presents a news slop job it} can bring any kind of solid or credible ground, it might {rebound as} relevant.
Usually the cases they bring, will not last 2.5 minutes in a room filled with accredited reporters with modest fact checking chops or a legal analyst.  If it doesn’t stand up to the punch tests in real analysis, then well, it gets a reputation for attempting to charge for a freak show or capitalize on human horror. 
That is why people throw it out. Pardon, that is why I throw a lot of this stuff out.  If that makes me a simpleton, I will live to report opinion another day. You are just not going to find me among the enthralled who watch snuff films, analyze cold cases or pore over vague data from child porn cases.  
You will just not find me. I won’t be there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s