- 15 Nov 2024 23:52
#15329917
Alex Jones ran a media website called InfoWars. It specialized in stories about the dangers of too much government power, and often bordered on the edge of conspiracy theory. The news coverage often was overly sensationalized.
At one point the business was bringing in $20 million in annual revenue from commissions on products it advertised (mainly survivalist products and health supplements).
The website got 10 million visits a month, making it even more viewed than other mainstream news sites like Newsweek or The Economist.
In mid-2018, other mainstream user interactive websites like YouTube, Facebook, Apple, Spotify began banning many InfoWars videos. YouTube removed all of the accounts run by InfoWars. Before then, one of those accounts had 2.4 million subscriptions. A large number of other big mainstream interactive video and podcast sites also moved to block InfoWars.
It is believed that part of the reason there was such a widespread effort to block InfoWars videos is because InfoWars was running what were often speculative news stories that went counter to the narrative of the mainstream media, which was trying to make then-President Donald Trump look bad. In a sensationalistic manner, InfoWars often made allegations against individuals who were connected to news stories that was not completely validated.
A large part of this had to do with politics and political ideology. InfoWars was siding with Trump, and the internet media companies, who were all aligned with the progressive Left, were offended and wanted to censor the opposing narrative. Especially since in the case of InfoWars the coverage was borderline outrageous and over the top, almost similar to the feel of tabloid journalism.
And then there was the fact that InfoWars consistently had a theme that was suspicious of government - often running on the side of conspiracy theory. In a way, this is intrinsically opposed to the ideology on the Left that aims to set up a system where government is more empowered.
However, in the aftermath of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks (2001) and U.S. invasion of Iraq (2003), InfoWars had supported conspiracy theories and coverage that did not put then-President George W. Bush in a good light. InfoWars opposed the policies of the so-called "the War on Terror". For this reason, InfoWars was not on the enemy list of the progressive political side, during that time.
InfoWars was viewed as kind of wacky and not the most credible, but still it was an independent media source that was anxious to sound the alarm about possibilities of big government abuses of power.
At the end of 2012 there was the Sandy Hook school shooting. The mainstream media was trying to leverage the story to push more restrictive gun control laws, of course probably with political ends in mind as well. InfoWars had always believed in individual civil liberties and suspicion of government, and strongly opposed more gun control. InfoWars pushed the idea that the Sandy Hook incident was faked by the government to be able to have an excuse to pass more gun control laws. Not only was this entering into the territory of conspiracy theory, but it also put them in conflict with the idea the mainstream media was trying to foster at the time. InfoWars went beyond just the idea that there was possibility the incident was faked by the government, and accused the parents of the children who had been murdered of being liars, actors paid to play the part of parents whose children had been killed.
Because of the type of audience that InfoWars had (which included many crazy and unhinged conspiracy-believers) this ended up leading to harassment of the family members of the 26 victims.
Alex Jones was sued by the family members. The lawsuits were filed both in New Hampshire, where the school shooting incident had taken place, and in Travis county in Texas, which is where Jones lives and InfoWars is based.
Jones lived in the Austin area of Texas. While the state of Texas does have a conservative Republican controlled government, the area of Austin had become very politically progressive in the 15 years prior to the lawsuit. So it is very probable there may have been some political and ideological bias.
A jury held in a court in Connecticut ordered Jones to have to pay more than $1.4 billion to the families who suffered harassment. A jury held in a court in Texas ordered Jones to have to pay $50 million to the families.
This seems extremely excessive and outrageously unfair. It also raises some legal jurisdictional concerns, since Jones was being held financially responsible in a state where he had not been because of what he had published on the internet.
This would completely bankrupt the company and put an end to InfoWars.
In December 2023, in response to the ongoing lawsuit Jones offered the families a settlement of $55 million. ($5.5 million a year for 10 years, with more possible depending on Jones' income) The families rejected the settlement offer and wanted more money.
( Alex Jones offers Sandy Hook victims' families $55 million to settle legal claims , Chloe Veltman, NPR, December 16, 2023 )
I will concede that what Alex Jones did was wrong, and even reprehensible. He went too far and did not do adequate or responsible investigation before running the story. But this lawsuit with gigantic amounts of money is ridiculous and not right.
Think about this. Someone based in Texas can be sued for over a billion dollars because he ran a news story that some people all the way in Connecticut claimed caused them problems.
I understand there are libel laws, but even that is a stretch to apply in a case like this. I wouldn't exactly say the reputations of those family members were "ruined".
This lawsuit was mainly about the harassment those family members suffered. And in my view, Alex Jones cannot be directly and entirely blamed for that. This harassment was perpetrated by individuals.
(Are we going to put the absolute entirety of the blame the media for stirring up a bunch of stupid people who couldn't bother to actually investigate things for themselves before they accepted the belief and committed a crime?)
If you listen to interviews with the family members, they are happy Alex Jones is finally being punished and held to account for false news story coverage. But we also need to consider that a bigger reason these family members are happy because they will be getting a gigantic amount of money - most of that money they do not deserve.
I think what happened has some very concerning implications for the rights of free speech and freedom of the press.
This seems like just more accumulating evidence that progressives are not really that supportive of freedom of the press, despite the frequent denials to the contrary.
Even if you don't like Alex Jones, what type of precedent is this ultimately going to set, or could it set?
The mainstream media mostly seems to be celebrating this outcome, and has made no mention of the blatant unfairness of it, or the implications it has to freedom of the press and a free media. This was a politically targeted government take down of a media company.
At one point the business was bringing in $20 million in annual revenue from commissions on products it advertised (mainly survivalist products and health supplements).
The website got 10 million visits a month, making it even more viewed than other mainstream news sites like Newsweek or The Economist.
In mid-2018, other mainstream user interactive websites like YouTube, Facebook, Apple, Spotify began banning many InfoWars videos. YouTube removed all of the accounts run by InfoWars. Before then, one of those accounts had 2.4 million subscriptions. A large number of other big mainstream interactive video and podcast sites also moved to block InfoWars.
It is believed that part of the reason there was such a widespread effort to block InfoWars videos is because InfoWars was running what were often speculative news stories that went counter to the narrative of the mainstream media, which was trying to make then-President Donald Trump look bad. In a sensationalistic manner, InfoWars often made allegations against individuals who were connected to news stories that was not completely validated.
A large part of this had to do with politics and political ideology. InfoWars was siding with Trump, and the internet media companies, who were all aligned with the progressive Left, were offended and wanted to censor the opposing narrative. Especially since in the case of InfoWars the coverage was borderline outrageous and over the top, almost similar to the feel of tabloid journalism.
And then there was the fact that InfoWars consistently had a theme that was suspicious of government - often running on the side of conspiracy theory. In a way, this is intrinsically opposed to the ideology on the Left that aims to set up a system where government is more empowered.
However, in the aftermath of the World Trade Center terrorist attacks (2001) and U.S. invasion of Iraq (2003), InfoWars had supported conspiracy theories and coverage that did not put then-President George W. Bush in a good light. InfoWars opposed the policies of the so-called "the War on Terror". For this reason, InfoWars was not on the enemy list of the progressive political side, during that time.
InfoWars was viewed as kind of wacky and not the most credible, but still it was an independent media source that was anxious to sound the alarm about possibilities of big government abuses of power.
At the end of 2012 there was the Sandy Hook school shooting. The mainstream media was trying to leverage the story to push more restrictive gun control laws, of course probably with political ends in mind as well. InfoWars had always believed in individual civil liberties and suspicion of government, and strongly opposed more gun control. InfoWars pushed the idea that the Sandy Hook incident was faked by the government to be able to have an excuse to pass more gun control laws. Not only was this entering into the territory of conspiracy theory, but it also put them in conflict with the idea the mainstream media was trying to foster at the time. InfoWars went beyond just the idea that there was possibility the incident was faked by the government, and accused the parents of the children who had been murdered of being liars, actors paid to play the part of parents whose children had been killed.
Because of the type of audience that InfoWars had (which included many crazy and unhinged conspiracy-believers) this ended up leading to harassment of the family members of the 26 victims.
Alex Jones was sued by the family members. The lawsuits were filed both in New Hampshire, where the school shooting incident had taken place, and in Travis county in Texas, which is where Jones lives and InfoWars is based.
Jones lived in the Austin area of Texas. While the state of Texas does have a conservative Republican controlled government, the area of Austin had become very politically progressive in the 15 years prior to the lawsuit. So it is very probable there may have been some political and ideological bias.
A jury held in a court in Connecticut ordered Jones to have to pay more than $1.4 billion to the families who suffered harassment. A jury held in a court in Texas ordered Jones to have to pay $50 million to the families.
This seems extremely excessive and outrageously unfair. It also raises some legal jurisdictional concerns, since Jones was being held financially responsible in a state where he had not been because of what he had published on the internet.
This would completely bankrupt the company and put an end to InfoWars.
In December 2023, in response to the ongoing lawsuit Jones offered the families a settlement of $55 million. ($5.5 million a year for 10 years, with more possible depending on Jones' income) The families rejected the settlement offer and wanted more money.
( Alex Jones offers Sandy Hook victims' families $55 million to settle legal claims , Chloe Veltman, NPR, December 16, 2023 )
I will concede that what Alex Jones did was wrong, and even reprehensible. He went too far and did not do adequate or responsible investigation before running the story. But this lawsuit with gigantic amounts of money is ridiculous and not right.
Think about this. Someone based in Texas can be sued for over a billion dollars because he ran a news story that some people all the way in Connecticut claimed caused them problems.
I understand there are libel laws, but even that is a stretch to apply in a case like this. I wouldn't exactly say the reputations of those family members were "ruined".
This lawsuit was mainly about the harassment those family members suffered. And in my view, Alex Jones cannot be directly and entirely blamed for that. This harassment was perpetrated by individuals.
(Are we going to put the absolute entirety of the blame the media for stirring up a bunch of stupid people who couldn't bother to actually investigate things for themselves before they accepted the belief and committed a crime?)
If you listen to interviews with the family members, they are happy Alex Jones is finally being punished and held to account for false news story coverage. But we also need to consider that a bigger reason these family members are happy because they will be getting a gigantic amount of money - most of that money they do not deserve.
I think what happened has some very concerning implications for the rights of free speech and freedom of the press.
This seems like just more accumulating evidence that progressives are not really that supportive of freedom of the press, despite the frequent denials to the contrary.
Even if you don't like Alex Jones, what type of precedent is this ultimately going to set, or could it set?
The mainstream media mostly seems to be celebrating this outcome, and has made no mention of the blatant unfairness of it, or the implications it has to freedom of the press and a free media. This was a politically targeted government take down of a media company.
- By annatar1914
- By Tainari88