Alternative Social Media Sites are Terrifying the Left and the NYT Is Showing It

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, File

Despite the right consistently proving that the chief purveyor of misinformation is left, you won’t hear a stop to the screams about “right-wing misinformation” echoing through the labyrinthian halls of the establishment media anytime soon.


The media has done its absolute best to paint any narrative the left has tossed into the public square as holy writ, and that means simultaneously squashing any counter-points that may rear their heads. This is where mainstream social media platforms come in.

Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and more, have done what they could to make sure the arguments against the leftist ideals they serve are as quiet and minimal as possible. Some points they won’t even let see the light of day, such as banning or deleting posts about the ineffectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines. They won’t even allow conversations to happen about certain topics such as questioning the 2020 elections, something YouTube will strike you for.

(READ: YouTube Just Bared Its Fangs at Me and I’ve Got a Response for Them)

But this has now opened up an opportunity for other platforms to take things to the next level. Rumble, Truth Social, GETTR, etc. have been able to grow thanks, in part, to the overbearing bias that mainstream social media platforms love to engage in. On these platforms, there is no ban hammer for speaking the truth. If someone disagrees, then they offer a debate.

This is how it should be, but the left doesn’t like debate. Many of its fantastical ideals can only exist in a vacuum. Reality is increasingly not the left’s friend.


But even while these arguments aren’t allowed on their platforms, they can still be seen on alternative platforms. In fact, thanks to something like the Streisand Effect, people actually go looking for these arguments on platforms, and once they go there once, they’re more likely to go back again at some point.

This is a huge issue for the left, and being the authoritarian they are, their natural reaction isn’t to engage in debate, it’s to try to make debate difficult. They want a monologue, not a dialogue. So naturally, they have to begin an attack. This usually begins as a complaint from a “reputable source” which then results in “calls to action” which then morphs into someone with a “D” next to their name in Washington providing a “sensible solution” to the “problem.”

The New York Times is always a good place to start for the left’s willingness to engage in blatant authoritarianism, and sure enough, the old gray hag began complaining that “misinformation” is still prevalent in our society because someone can go to a place like Rumble and get it. The expert they decided to tap for this is none other than Nina Jankowicz, the sing-song-loving would-be dictator of speech.


“I think the problem is worse than it’s ever been, frankly,” said Jankowicz according to the Times.

The NYT went on to call her a “disinformation expert” and she opined about how the pandemic and the January 6 riot divided people instead of bringing them together thanks to “misinformation”:

Ms. Jankowicz, the disinformation expert, said the nation’s social and political divisions had churned the waves of disinformation.

The controversies over how best to respond to the Covid-19 pandemic deepened distrust of government and medical experts, especially among conservatives. Mr. Trump’s refusal to accept the outcome of the 2020 election led to, but did not end with, the Capitol Hill violence.

“They should have brought us together,” Ms. Jankowicz said, referring to the pandemic and the riots. “I thought perhaps they could be kind of this convening power, but they were not.”

The NYT looks down on these platforms that “pride themselves on not moderating — censoring, as they put it — untrue statements in the name of free speech” and emphasis was put on just how dangerous it is that they exist since everything of note that appears there eventually finds its way to the mainstream platforms:


Nothing on the internet exists in a silo,” said Jared Holt, a senior manager on hate and extremism research at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue. “Whatever happens in alt platforms like Gab or Telegram or Truth makes its way back to Facebook and Twitter and others.”

In a more fair world, I’d say the NYT can complain all it wants to, but in the world we currently inhabit, when the NYT writes about how something is problematic for “democracy,” it’s usually followed up with activists turning it into a well-funded project.

All I can say is “man the defenses.” It wouldn’t be the first time the left has gone to war to reduce their opposition’s platforms to rubble and it won’t be the last.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos