learn the lessons from nostr:npub16w4vg0m04ypgn9ypz3pfcmj2pkasvkfyqs905tc5m3yjqath7h6q8v9ds6, nostr:npub1p0lum4mu40vuf3kqd8eg46gagw046y83empu8k7p8pm7yvpdx8hse4l49e and nostr:npub1cll9jkw064dzdjvzqw4fkrrx4cugwxxvtyagnfujhagheseekrrqs3u87g interviews - in the first place, that they’re no interviews but monologues and the journalist is just part of the scenography;

during the preceding week, walk through Putin’s traditional tropes and debunk them one by one, thus preparing audience and beating Russia’s scenario;

openly talk about Russia’s information warfare tactics, explaining how it rides Western media herd instincts

What had been done?

90% of Western media, including “Russia experts”, simply repeated Putin’s tropes voiced to Carlson - only some did it in real-time and some in the morning

🤷

Remember: when you share outrageous claims by a media personality with “OMG what a nonsense” comment, it’s like using “but” in an apology.

The only thing that matters is that you shared the outrageous claims, interacted with it, full stop.

You just told every single algorithm in the world the content needs to be boosted because it increases user engagement. And nobody really cares about your “OMG” after the algorithms kick in.

Outrageous and false claims need to be debunked, only sharing them is the worst way of doing it.

When you copy-paste the controversial fragment and criticise it as a quote, you are actually impacting its author the most. You are confronting their statement but without interacting with them and signalling the media platform that it’s worth boosting.