Follow The Questions: Q’s Breadcrumbs Ask All Citizens To Pay Close Attention To Vast Web

It just occurred to me that alot of “alternative” media, including InfoWars, (to a lesser extend) Cernovich and all the other biggies, rely on a domination model rather than an inclusion model. They rely on “fame” journalism and swelling audiences.  They do great work, but narration has taken over cautious bread-crumb fact finding and dot-connecting. So it begins to wash over your consciousness, like a “show.”

This, below, on the other hand, feels like a new tradition to me: It lays down a question grid–and an inclusive one, at that. Most media lays down an “answer” grid, and asks you to surrender some part of yourself, essentially, to “believe.”

So: Here are the questions “Q” asks that we keep in mind as this week’s news events unfold.

Comments

  1. Gary Ogden says:

    One more thought: Maybe Meuller really is a good guy. Such gravity in his face. What if he restores our faith in truth, justice, and the American way? We can rejoice, not because those folks will be wearing stripes, but because right occasionally triumphs over wrong. Or does this only happen on TV?

  2. Gary Ogden says:

    A couple of additional thoughts: 1. The Obama White House leaked like a sieve, and this may have been, to some extent, intentional, even though in his public statements it appeared he hated it. No leaks with the Meuller investigation. 2. I wonder what those 12 sealed indictments have to do with Weiner’s laptop. Perhaps we’ll have some answers tomorrow. Makes your head spin.

  3. Gary Ogden says:

    Fascinating stuff, and plausible. Saudi Arabia did just have a coup. Trump is out of the country at the moment. How is this relevant?

  4. Scott Gordon says:

    Great point and important concern.

    I wonder if some things have lulled the alternative media into presenting more answers, when they should be asking questions:

    1) the sheer quantity of answers contained in the Wikileaks vaults over the past few years. Outlets scramble to bring this to public attention because it provides context

    2) the pace of events since the election, and especially in the past few months – so much is happening that research departments and functions get overloaded – it becomes a competition to deliver the best summary narrative (and recent failures along that line should be sending journalists back to their research)

    Just a couple thoughts there.

    But the answer of course, is to resume asking the right questions.

  5. Stephen Ericson says:

    I love this post. That’s exactly how I feel about Alex Jones. It’s like a show and I have to believe or I’m …not it enough. Or I’m ‘one of them’.

    This video is perfect in terms of tone. It’s perfect. At the end where she say’s ‘we’ll get things wrong’ YES. Yes, things will be gotten wrong. Imagine that?

    Home internet sleuths who just try to pay attention to the blizzard of (mis) information will, sometimes, get things wrong…when it’s obvious that we, everyone, is being mislead.

  6. Stephen Ericson says:

    I think your reasoning above is almost exactly how I feel about Alex Jones.

    The video above is super on. That’s the level, the way I like to get information. It’s interesting. It’s just talking about the subject, asking questions. It’s not bludgeoning you.

Trackbacks

  1. […] assess this claim? It was only hours ago I learned the name “James Brower.” The source I posted about earlier, “Q” gave us this name. He is listed on Twitter as a former State Assistant (whatever […]

Speak Your Mind