Many thanks to Lbock
for the Tara declaration and Ruby Begonia
for the Kate James requests.
Everyone on here has been an invaluable source of information and insight.
[moderators: apologies if any of the text below strays too far off topic from the immediate lawsuit thread. Please feel free to delete]
The piece written by JM on the media blackout (and all the stuff I’ve read by JM) plus something AdelAgain
said a few pages back reflected the hopelessness and frustration so many of us feel (myself included).
But on a positive note and in practical terms, what can we learn? For a start, lack of reporting leaves its own footprint. Negative reporting leaves another (and neutral or positive reporting leave others). These sets will have their own characteristics. Common journalists or editors. Common masthead ownership. Common themes silenced or amplified.
And follow the money. Not just the flows of cash, but where money is not flowing. Just as we notice the blank areas in story coverage, what non-reporting doesn’t seem to be supported by obvious financial loss/gain decisions? A tabloid or gossip mag will publish anything salacious that won’t get them sued. So why wouldn’t they publish particular items or themes unless they had something to gain or lose? Foregoing profits should be setting off alarm bells in the same way that large profits do.
Being terrified of being next in Mr Depp’s defamation sights would explain some of the blackouts, but when the same mastheads behave in the same manner for almost any female on male violence, then we should know there is something bigger involved.
I haven’t done any metrics or measurements, but we all sense the general direction without putting numbers to it. There is organisation and coordination behind it, and with that comes criminal conspiracy, malicious prosecutions and predatory behaviour (imo). The very fact that Kaplan flips from exceedingly high profile cases like Weinstein and impeaching Trump to a celeb defamation case that has nearly zero mainstream press coverage is baffling (unless other undeclared motives are involved). Who is
paying Kaplan (and why)?
But unless there is mileage for the cases at hand (eg in additional charges or angles of attack), spending too much time looking at the blackout itself risks distracting from the issues (and revelations) before the courts.
I will close with this. It’s only an anecdote but here’s a first-hand account (mine) of how political censorship works: