The propaganda word 'conspiracist'
used by Daily Beast, Google Alerts
The original story about Jerome Corsi suing Alex Jones appeared in Alternet, which did not stoop to the use of this recently made-up smear word.
But
The Daily Beast and Google Alerts were happy to toss it out there. Interesting that the Google Alerts head with "conspiracist" appears atop a link to the Alternet story, which doesn't use that word.
Here is the Daily Beast headline:
BUREAU CHIEF BREAKS BAD
Corsi used to work for Infowars. Now he’s warring with it.
Here is the Google Alerts head:
Daily Beast
Jerome Corsi sued InfoWars founder Alex Jones on Thursday, heating up the feud between two of the nation's top conspiracy theorists.
Although the alert credits Daily Beast, the link goes to Alternet.
Does "conspiracist" rate as a real English word? That would depend on whom you consult. Most dictionary makers deem that a word joins the English language if a few English-speakers use it. As an old copy editor, I resist that standard. I am more inclined to agree with the writers of English usage and style guides. But, my most recent editions of highly regarded usage and style guides are too old to include that peculiar locution.
I bring this up because virtually the only people who deploy the recently coined term "conspiracist" are trolls running interference for the Deep State.
Why would a group coin and deploy such a term when the term "conspiracy theorist" is available? Why? Because, after all, the government itself is always rolling out conspiracy theories that it expects us to believe, no matter how bizarre. But conspiracist conveys the idea of "wing nut" while sounding snooty enough to permit a professor or journalist to use it without being chided for bias. Nevertheless, "conspiracist" is a politically loaded term. It is intended thus: "I am branding this person with my biased viewpoint."
Thought: Why not brand various lefties and Deep Staters as "conspiracists"? Why should they be immune from feeling the sting of made-up "bad words"? On second thought, why should we stoop quite that low?
Well, what would you expect of the Daily Beast? But, as the next presidential contest gears up, we are seeing what to expect from Google and others in Big Tech. Conspiracists -- equals anyone critical of the globalists and their liberal/radical Democrat allies-- must be squelched.
By the way, I have begun reading Jill Abramson's Merchants of Truth and will report back in due course, which may be a while yet, as I tend to read quite a few books simultaneously. On that note, I have just received Kimberly Strassel's The Intimidation Game -- How the Left is Silencing Free Speech. This book came out in 2016, but I am assuming there is much that remains relevant, particularly in light of Strassel's more recent Wall Street Journal columns concerning muzzling of conservatives. I will report back on this book also, when I get around to it, which, unfortunately, may be a while.
I suppose it is necessary to repeat that I appreciate that Jones published an investigative piece of mine on holes in the official 9/11 story, but that fact hardly means I am a major supporter of his various positions. I am a major supporter of his right of free speech, and I cast a jaundiced eye on the motives of some of those making war on his First Amendment right.
Here is the Daily Beast headline:
BUREAU CHIEF BREAKS BAD
Conspiracists Clash as Jerome Corsi Sues Infowars’ Alex Jones
Corsi used to work for Infowars. Now he’s warring with it.
Here is the Google Alerts head:
Conspiracists Clash as Jerome Corsi Sues InfoWars' Alex Jones
Daily Beast
Jerome Corsi sued InfoWars founder Alex Jones on Thursday, heating up the feud between two of the nation's top conspiracy theorists.
Although the alert credits Daily Beast, the link goes to Alternet.
Does "conspiracist" rate as a real English word? That would depend on whom you consult. Most dictionary makers deem that a word joins the English language if a few English-speakers use it. As an old copy editor, I resist that standard. I am more inclined to agree with the writers of English usage and style guides. But, my most recent editions of highly regarded usage and style guides are too old to include that peculiar locution.
I bring this up because virtually the only people who deploy the recently coined term "conspiracist" are trolls running interference for the Deep State.
Why would a group coin and deploy such a term when the term "conspiracy theorist" is available? Why? Because, after all, the government itself is always rolling out conspiracy theories that it expects us to believe, no matter how bizarre. But conspiracist conveys the idea of "wing nut" while sounding snooty enough to permit a professor or journalist to use it without being chided for bias. Nevertheless, "conspiracist" is a politically loaded term. It is intended thus: "I am branding this person with my biased viewpoint."
Thought: Why not brand various lefties and Deep Staters as "conspiracists"? Why should they be immune from feeling the sting of made-up "bad words"? On second thought, why should we stoop quite that low?
Well, what would you expect of the Daily Beast? But, as the next presidential contest gears up, we are seeing what to expect from Google and others in Big Tech. Conspiracists -- equals anyone critical of the globalists and their liberal/radical Democrat allies-- must be squelched.
By the way, I have begun reading Jill Abramson's Merchants of Truth and will report back in due course, which may be a while yet, as I tend to read quite a few books simultaneously. On that note, I have just received Kimberly Strassel's The Intimidation Game -- How the Left is Silencing Free Speech. This book came out in 2016, but I am assuming there is much that remains relevant, particularly in light of Strassel's more recent Wall Street Journal columns concerning muzzling of conservatives. I will report back on this book also, when I get around to it, which, unfortunately, may be a while.
I suppose it is necessary to repeat that I appreciate that Jones published an investigative piece of mine on holes in the official 9/11 story, but that fact hardly means I am a major supporter of his various positions. I am a major supporter of his right of free speech, and I cast a jaundiced eye on the motives of some of those making war on his First Amendment right.
No comments:
Post a Comment