Why do so many people believe Blue Kama was inaugurated? Inaugurated by the fake news to what?

Why do I read the newspaper? I skim it to find the general issues of the day (as defined by the MSM) and once in a while learn something interesting about … trivia stuff.
… It’s up to the blogosphere to “deconstruct” the omissions and lies–
* * *
john moulder on August 12, 2005 at 11:47 am said:
I worked at a state agency for over 25 years, an institution that occasionally landed in the news. I never read a newspaper article of any length concerning us that didn’t contain inaccuracies. I am not exaggerating. We used to laugh & wonder at the misinformation they published about us. I’m sure other ex-bureaucrats could relate similar anecdotes. I suspect that much of the time it was ineptitude but sometimes it was seemed that the article was hostile or that our agency was simply being used to make a point — or both.

* * *
I would think that being attuned to the GMAE is something like being red-pilled.

Fifteen and a half years ago I wrote this post on that subject. It was already becoming rampant, and a big problem.

My parents got a subscription and I browsed through a couple of issues.

What a huge contrast with their local paper, the LA Times. Most print media is so biased, it’s propaganda. I used to be a daily newspaper reader, and stopped due to the biases.

Now as mentioned above, I pick and choose. Don Surber and Ace of Spades is how I begin my day, and usually have done good links.

I was reading the Washington Examiner, but their anti Trump bias became too blatant.

A litmus test I’m doing is if an author / publication says there was no or insignificant voter fraud, I usually end reading. They just took a huge negative hit to their credibility.

Gateway Pundit though daft and sensationalist does have a network of local reporters that get behind the scenes and gets us into details of a story. It is so sad when it’s reporting is better than the NYT and Washington Post, CNN/ABC/NBS and MSNBC (who watches these anyway?).

I reserve my judgement on CBS until I see what Catherine Herridge is able to do.

Zero Hedge deserves mention. They are returning to form after the 2012 Obama purge of contributors. Let’s see if they can keep it up through Biden.

These are reporters of news and not commentators of news which I put this blog and Meaning of History in.

You have to look at people’s area of expertise. Anything that Sundance says on Congressional going’s on I trust. It comes to pass. ShipWreckedCrew on the processes and procedures of the Department of Justice. I don’t hold any credence on his discussions of the motives of the actors as witnessed by his apologetic writings concerning the Barr and Durham whitewash. There are two systems of Justice.

Excellent, of course.
I should have thought of them myself.
Their work is always worth perusing.

I think you’ll appreciate the post written by Sarah Hoyt that I referenced above. She makes your point, along with a few other variants. Here’s the link again, https://accordingtohoyt.com/2021/01/14/how-to-read-the-news-in-totalitarianism/

In much the same way as free Social Media provides content to lure you in further (as the unstated-but-intended product), modern media lures people in with provocative content in order to provoke an outward response, thus perpetuating the news cycle. I’ve re-programmed myself; when I see the ‘anonymous source’ motif making an appearance, I immediately disregard the material as salient information, and instead interpret it as a device for pointing the story in a certain direction. Often, the direction is toward ‘Outrage’, or some other idea engineered to influence the attendant expected response. One has to take the ‘Mentat’ approach sometimes when trying to understand the purpose of so much reporting. It’s a good start to assume it is not about the story itself.