Michael Schellenberger

Rank 39 of 47
|
Score -98
MAZE
@mazemoore
·
336d
@shellenberger Before this week they probably published an article a week on government fraud and waste.
2/20/2025, 5:14:35 AM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
328d
The media and Dems say that everything Trump identifies as a problem doesn’t exist and is just a conspiracy theory. They’re such knee-jerk partisans they can’t help but to further demolish their credibility. Just 31% of the public trusts them and the number could decline further
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
328d
Just like there was tons of evidence of labs leaking viruses before Covid, there was tons of evidence of waste fraud and abuse before DOGE.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
328d
Here’s the Times a week ago lying brazenly. Scroll down the thread and you can see they later alter the headline. They’re effectively saying that accusations of government waste, fraud and abuse are a conspiracy theory. Everything’s fine. Media gaslighting as usual.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
336d
The New York Times says “Musk Asserts Without Proof That Bureaucracy Is Rife With Fraud.” Seriously? The GAO — under Biden — estimated last year that we are losing $233-$521 billion *per year* to fraud. Guys, it’s right there. Why do you continue with this… fraud? SMH
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
328d
Both of these examples of disinformation were published today
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
328d
For weeks the media have insisted that Trump and Elon were lying about rampant government fraud, waste, or abuse. Finally WSJ admits that “wasteful spending… isn’t hard to find.” Ya think?

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing media credibility and government issues. It criticizes media and political partisanship, suggesting a lack of trust in media reporting on government fraud and waste.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement could potentially harm media credibility by accusing them of partisanship without providing specific evidence, which may not align with striving to do no harm. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not respect the privacy and dignity of media organizations by labeling them as 'knee-jerk partisans.' [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding or empathy, as it uses accusatory language rather than fostering constructive dialogue. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in personal attacks against media organizations, which does not align with constructive criticism. [-1]