In a world where MSM does not tell you the things you want to be true, but are true nevertheless, desperate people resort to grasping on to bullshit. And almost certainly not because they believe the bullshit but because they want to make it known that they would rather seek out the bullshit than admit the other side was right all along.
You should remember that the MSM needs money like every other outlet, and they’re not going to sit on their hands and get scooped by Breitbart if they can help it. At the very least, if it’s a real story, they’ll run it after Breitbart does.
Knowing those factors, we have a pretty easy tool to detect bullshit: the dateline of the article. If it’s more than 6-12 weeks old, and the MSM still isn’t mentioning it, even to say “Breitbart is reporting this story, we have no idea if it’s true”, then it’s probably fake. You will notice that many of the 2nd-tier outlets don’t use datelines or bylines for this very reason. They don’t want you cross-checking their content against reality.
This advice is not for you. You cannot process information that contradicts your prior beliefs. You have a childish sort of mind that assumes if your favorite story isn’t reported, then it obviously means that the MSM decided to lose money and kill the story to help the Democrats. You are absolutely hopeless; you prefer to wallow in the depths of ignorance, so nobody can possibly help you out of it.
The mainstream media is not covering the secret moon base on the far side of the moon that is being used by the mole-men in conjunction with the shape-shifting lizard people.
We must therefore conclude that the MSM is hiding these facts from the people, for nefarious purposes.
The disinformation campaign that sends out complete bullshit relies on the Useful Idiots to spread this crap around. They are valuable resources in the drive to destroy the USA.
I grow so weary of “Why isn’t the MSM covering this!?”
I know I’m just screaming into the void at this point, but why, indeed, is TheBlaze covering a story that the MSM isn’t? Well first of all, what is this story? Nearest I can tell, it’s “Robert Reich, former somebody and current nobody, tweets something.”
Now answer your own question – where should this bombshell of a story be covered? NPR? Above the fold on the WSJ? Should the NYT be sending out a crack team of investigative reporters? Honestly, answer your own question – the MSM isn’t covering this because there’s no story to cover. Christ. And I’m guessing you think the leftist media is manipulative. Guess what this whole article from TheBlaze is? It’s pure manipulation. It’s candy for people who hate the left. Yum yum yum yum, gobble that shit up.
It’s exhausting to be constantly reminded that these are the same fucking idiots who read articles in checkout lines titled, “What the Experts Don’t Want You to Know!”
The mole men have developed an anti-aging formula on their moon base. The MSM is not covering this because they are in cahoots with Big Medicine, who want to profit from sickness.
Think twice before linking to it. Very often when a “story” isn’t covered by MSM, it’s a good bet that it isn’t really much of a story, if it’s a story at all.
Look into the specifics. Does the writer include actual quotes from the person who is the nominal subject of the story? Check that the quotes are real, and that they haven’t been truncated in such a way as to make them (the quotes) seem egregiously outrage-worthy.
If the “story” includes extrapolation by the writer (such as “This should lead to black listing and censorship. others want this to lead to prison terms for trump supporters”), it’s likely that a better characterization would be “opinion piece.”
Doing these three things, at minimum would fall under the category of “mak[ing] a case for [the link] being worthwhile to click on.”
But I hear that you don’t have a whole lot of time on your hands. Under the circumstances, perhaps consider that posting links that don’t have significant coverage in MSM isn’t for you.