The world needs more real Investigative Journalists.

Those Anons who have writing skills can fix this problem

By writing more

On Facebook (where long posts are allowed) on Linkedin (ditto) on various BLOG sites where you can easily create your own journal to inject into the flow of news.

Best thing about having a BLOG is that you can still make an impact on Twitter or Instagram by posting headlines that link to a longer article.

GET PEOPLE THINKING AGAIN!!!

Anons, Now it is time to do your part. Telling the truth is only a few keystrokes away. Just because the information is there for Fags/Autist does not mean the info is there for the [sheep]. The time is now to create real journalism regarding the dough. Not Twitter Warriors and PaYtriots, YT trash talkers and fake [de]coders. They all just take your hard work and ruin it. Do your part and begin creating real NARRATIVES regarding what is actually going on.

> Now is not the time to publish this material. A call to action for Patriots will come. But be at the ready. Start shifting the narrative now. Together WE are strong.

#WeAreTheNewsNow

Think Critically, Think Big, Only the Truth Matters. WE are the only ones who can make it habben.

The bakers have diligently kneaded a finely wrapped present almost ready to be consumed by the masses.

Will you be ready when the time comes?

certain copypasta above courtesy of CivAnon. Used without permission to maintain that revolutionary air of mystery

>>9189194

Why We Should Stop Asking Whether Bloggers Are Journalists

The problem is often framed wrongly this way: Do bloggers count as journalists? For example, the New York Times "Room for Debate" feature is titled "Are All Bloggers Journalists?" The description of the online forum asks, "How should judges decide who is protected and who isn't?" Kelli L. Sager, a First Amendment lawyer participating in the debate, writes, "Because most laws were written before the Internet existed," she explains, "they often refer to then-existing media newspapers, magazines and the like or simply to 'journalists,' without defining who is a journalist." The central framing is always "who is a journalist" – who, who, who. The question of protection always rests on the question of who the person is that is committing the act of journalism. Is this person a journalist?

The idea that press freedom is about protecting journalists is anachronistic, something we have pasted onto an older idea. When Thomas Jefferson wrote about press freedom, the idea of a professional journalist didn't exist in any modern sense. His ideas were motivated by the dual legacies of licensing and censorship. In the 17th century, censors regulated presses so tightly that only licensed printers could operate and they could publish only books explicitly approved by the queen. For Jefferson, a protection for a particular, favored business would have smacked of exactly the sort of licensing scheme he was trying to avoid.

fmi 3-07.22