A general search of New Hampshire’s watchdog media continues to suggest that they are not so interested in the truth as they are in appeasing the political powers they should keep in check. A sort of, but I’ll lose my sources if I tell too much truth. We at the ‘Grok could care less.
The list of conspiracy theories that came true is long and distinguished. In fact, we did more for science and to help the medical freedom groups that rose to fight for your rights and liberties than any corporate media in the Granite State. You’ll also be hard-pressed to find much to challenge the approved narratives in the internet “media” subculture. InDepthNH won’t touch it, and NH Journal is content to fondle it the way a creeper touches women’s butts as they pass by on a crowded subway platform.
There are others, but most exist to parrot, not challenge. Sharing the wrong science might affect fundraising.
I rely on fundraising to pay my bills, but the truth and debate are more important here, even when we may disagree. How else are we to arrive at the truth? If we do not let writers write, commenters comment, or people share links, research, and opinions, no one will be able to hear anything over the chorus.
There are no better examples of this than the mRNA product and another of Pfizer’s miracle cures, Paxlovid. The Health Freedom sites and .orgs that sprung up have been ceaseless pursuers of truth. They share news, data, alternative opinions, research, and fight for human liberty. We’ve been doing that for eighteen years and appreciate the company. It’s a thankless task without which we’d have only had the approved narratives that continue to confound self-proclaimed media guardians of the truth.
There is very little left in the way of clothing (real or imagined) on the mRNA emperor, but you won’t find evidence of that truth in New Hampshire’s corporate media. They might still be on the hook for all the ad money they took to support the Public Health Industrial complex narratives. Even Newsmax and Fox were alleged to have been bought in return for some measure of favorable COVID Policy coverage.
Paxlovid is another Pfizer product that was demonstrably ineffective and, in some cases, dangerous from very early on but continues to be advertised (much like the COVID ‘Vaccines'( without any consideration for the risks. I was in a supermarket yesterday, taking advantage of a sale to stock up on essentials. They had a public service announcement about getting vaccinated for COVID.
While the COVID injections are all risk, no reward, Paxlovid appears to be, at best, useless. It does not shorten symptoms. It is no more effective than a placebo. Over at the Dossier, they are reporting that it doesn’t shorten symptoms, and Paxlovid Rebound – a problem known since launch – is twenty-five times more likely than advertised (not that you’ll find it advertised in local “media”).
The Union Leader shared some news about the Paxlovid rebound in 2022, with the caveat that the drug still saves lives. The Pfizer/FDA/CDC/NIH Laundromat said the same about mRNA. We encourage you to find your truth but it doesn’t look good for Paxlovid.
The Union Leader also has a very amusing article this year (from Bloomberg) on how the COVID tests don’t work as well as they used to. We’ve got dozens of reports of how badly these tests worked from day one because it was not designed for that. The FDA and CDC (even the WHO) repeatedly observed issues, issued recalls, and required alternatives. Where is any of this reporting in local ‘media’?
The Grok, at RebuildNH, LibertyBlockNH, Health Freedom NH, and a few others, were brave enough to challenge the approved narratives. I get that it’s a horse we’ve been kicking for years, but “The Media” are still at it, and tens of thousands of Granite Staters have yet to figure this out.
It is not just public health messaging that they get wrong, skew, message, or misrepresent. It is not just New Hampshire; it is not just that some stories are incomplete. There is a deliberate lack of balance and, let’s face it, honesty about the issues presented. It is also not always the reporter. They answer to editors, and if you want to keep your job, you stop trying to tell the whole truth.
It is, therefore, not in your best interest to trust them on any other story they tell.
One of the unwritten conditions for donating to Grok is that we will never allow donors to dictate content. Let me tell you, it makes it harder to reach goals, but so what? As I noted above, media that encourages open debate and disagreeing-our-way to some middle ground littered with unpleasant truths is preferable. We like it when people disagree and work through it, and as long as you can be civil, you are welcome to your opinion. Just be willing to hear someone else’s and hash out the details until you find a middle ground or agree to disagree.
It’s all good.
It is also how we prevent falling into some institutionalized echo chamber of which there is always some risk.
But the professionals don’t seem at all concerned about that.
