> In what sense? The media has always censored information that can't be verified.
If that was the case, we wouldn't have been involved in any wars in the past few decades.
> Nytimes doesn't publish articles about flat earth theory.
Of course not because lies about "flat earth" doesn't serve their interests. But lies/propaganda about "incubator babies"/nayirah testimony and yellowcake to start wars serves their interests.
Tons of unverified nonsense gets published. And tons of truth gets censored. Media, like the nytimes, are in the business of propaganda. They exist to sell wars and benefit the elite, not to peddle nonsense like "flat earth theory".
If a topic is important (nationally/geopolitically) and it's in a newspaper, you can be sure it's pretty much nonsense. The more respected the news agency, the more likely it is a lie.
> Either that, or there are specific sourcing rules for journalists based on the credibility of the sources.
A kuwaiti diplomat's daughter or intelligence officers are not credible sources. And neither is the nytimes, wsj or any major news company at this point.
> Giuliani has burned his credibility, and the entire laptop story is on its face unbelievable.
It's far more credible than incubator babies or yellowcake.
> These other stories like Yellow Cake came from legit sources that were credible at the time.
No they weren't. It was intentionally manufactured lies. The nayirah testimony was a PR generated propaganda. And yellow cake was propaganda conjured up by the nytimes and pro-war intelligence groups.
> You are comparing apples and oranges.
You are right, I am comparing actual lies that led to millions of people's deaths and a possible lie. You are right, we don't know the truth of the hunter story yet. But we know for sure that nayirah and yellow cake were intentionally manufactured lies to start wars.
If that was the case, we wouldn't have been involved in any wars in the past few decades.
> Nytimes doesn't publish articles about flat earth theory.
Of course not because lies about "flat earth" doesn't serve their interests. But lies/propaganda about "incubator babies"/nayirah testimony and yellowcake to start wars serves their interests.
Tons of unverified nonsense gets published. And tons of truth gets censored. Media, like the nytimes, are in the business of propaganda. They exist to sell wars and benefit the elite, not to peddle nonsense like "flat earth theory".
If a topic is important (nationally/geopolitically) and it's in a newspaper, you can be sure it's pretty much nonsense. The more respected the news agency, the more likely it is a lie.