Not Reporter, Propagandist. Not News, Propaganda

Now I know I am a mere puff of air in the typhoon of online discourse, but I do wish I could borrow a few decibels to make this one point stick: never use the enemy’s language.

For a prime example, do not say “biological man”. Say “man”. Try this substitution in any instance you see the former being used. Example: “Biological male defeats female boxer in just 46 seconds at the Paris Olympics, punching her in the head.” New cast: “Man defeats woman boxer, punching her in the head”. Stronger.

My dear friends, saying “biological male” is like saying “automotive car” or “equine horse”. The redundancy sounds goofy and it weakens the word. There are no, and can be no, other kinds of males besides biological males. Do not say the phrase. It belongs to the enemy. It suggests there are such things as non-biological males. There are not.

There are many other examples, two of which we meet below. You are aiding and abetting the enemy by using their words. Break yourself of the habit.

Here are introductions from two examples which drive the idea home. You will know Michael Anton. Here he is reacting to a person who produces material for some outlet.

USA Today recently published a piece excoriating Project 2025 and all who worked on it as (you guessed it) “racist.” I had very little to do with Project 2025—I was asked for some thoughts on how best to organize the National Security Council Staff, provided those thoughts, and then was never contacted again—but my name ended up on the thing, so I suppose that, according to the sketchy rules of “journalistic ethics,” that makes me “fair game.”

At any rate, USA Today reported that I did not respond to a request for comment. In fact, I did not receive any word that USA Today wanted a comment, but I guess that doesn’t really matter since I wouldn’t have commented anyway. It’s obvious from the resulting article, and would have been obvious from the inquiry, that this was just another example of “murderous gutter journalism,” which I previously described here.

Both the paper and the writer were and are acting in bad faith: they had a narrative all pre-cooked, they looked around for things they could twist to fit that narrative, and they proceeded to slap together a paint-by-numbers “story” to smear their enemies as “racist.”

Make no mistake, that is how they see us: as enemies, and how they see their own role: as righteous avengers destroying the wicked. This is not journalism; this is character assassination with scarcely the pretense of reporting.

Now other entry from Curtis Yarvin (ellipsis original):

Alas, the highly respected journalism industry is up to its usual trick of portraying me as a “significant influence” on random normie politicians whom I’ve barely even met.

Sure. I have shaken hands with Senator Vance a couple of times. I’ll bet he has also shaken hands with someone who shook hands with Jeffrey Epstein. So have I, in fact! That makes us all pedos. While I admire the Senator and think he has some potential, he is hardly a “friend” of mine and I can’t imagine I have “influenced” him. Trust me, guys: once I’m actually the sinister Svengali behind one of these people, y’all will know.

I have a message for this Gil Duran fellow. I rarely respond to journalists, especially in public. But my patience has its limits.

Dear Mr. Duran: congratulations. Nice work. I already feel intimidated by your investigative prowess and that of your fine interns. Biodiesel! Even more—I admire your ambitious and connected career. You did comms for both Jerry Brown and Dianne Feinstein, leaving you two handshakes twice over from…the Rev. Jim Jones

These both go on at some length, with all indications that a lot of work went into them. Alas, both efforts fail. Anton and Yarvin make well their cases of innocence, and they both call their enemies clever names and paint these enemies as the conscienceless operatives they are. But they should not have bothered. Their efforts have done only harm.

What happens when you call a shark, with his shredded prey in his jaws, “an animal” or “a killer” or “a vicious brute”, or any of dozens of similar accurate epithets?

The shark smiles. (Ignore scientists: sharks can smile.) The shark swells with pride. The shark swims back to his school and boasts of the terror he caused. His mates praise him and are filled with bloodlust. Full of pride, he swims back out and seeks new victims.

Complaining about maltreatment from a Regime propagandist has precisely the same effect as a colonel carping about how enemy soldiers attacking his side are mean.

It is fine to analyze propaganda and the behavior of propagandists, even harshly. Yet it must be at clinical remove, as a pathologist analyzing a disease. It is no good using terms like “journalist”, “reporter”, “news”, “legacy news”, “mainstream media”, even “fake news”, or any similar term which confirms in the mind of the propagandists that their work is effective. Try not to use their names. They are interchangeable entities anyway.

There is no point asking when propagandists will “cover” a story detrimental to their side. The answer is never. Asking gives them the assumed authority they seek.

So. Do not use “reporter” or “journalist”, say “propagandist”. Do not say “news” or “media” or, worse, “mainstream media”, say “propaganda.”

The people putting out material revel when any insult is thrown at them—except this one. You will find that these answer. Compare: “The Lamestream media got their psyop talking points for Walz” and “Propagandists release Walz propaganda”. Or “The mainstream media are actually discussing banning social media to stop the spread of ‘inflammatory information'” and “Propagandists are actually discussing banning social media to stop the spread of ‘inflammatory information’.” Both are stronger. Try it yourself.

I allow there will be coinages and neologisms that might better take the place of “propagand(a)(ists)”. Those words are bulky. What’s needed are one syllable monikers. Any ideas?

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: \$WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.