Maybe now the Times and other bluechecks can see the problem with becoming propaganda arms of the US government on mRNA shots and Covid
All that credibility the media has squandered over the last two years would come in handy now
Yes, when I tell you the bioweapons story is nonsense, some of you will tell me I’m “controlled opposition” or a “useful confusion official.” Whatever that may be.
But I trust you, readers. I know the vast majority of you know better.
I may be wrong, but I have one goal, to give you the truth as best I can, whether it skewers Donald Trump or Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin or Albert Bourla, the world’s favorite veterinarian (his book is gonna be a doozy).
My brand is clear-eyed asshole cynicism, and I’m stuck with it.
The first rule of investigative journalism is to be equally suspicious of everyone. If your mother says she loves you, check it out. (This is not necessarily the best or happiest way to live, but somebody’s gotta do it.)
But somewhere along the way the Times etc forgot the first rule. They forgot that their job is not to be an arm of the public health establishment, no matter how much they love The Science, or the Democratic Party, now matter how much they hate Donald Trump.
They spent the last two years torching their credibility. They earned your distrust one piece of propaganda about masks and lockdowns and lab leaks and rare and mild myocarditis at a time.
Now, no matter how much they huff and puff, they can barely touch even the lousiest propaganda. Which is a shame. Because I promise you that the frontline war reporters on the ground in Ukraine really are putting their lives on the line to get to the truth.
Maybe the editors back in New York and Washington will remember the risks those folks are running the next time they decide telling the truth about the failure of the mRNA shots is just too much trouble and might make the wrong people happy.
Probably not. But maybe.
Even a cynic can hope.