So strange, it's not broken down by number of users per platform.

For instance, "election influencers" on YouTube? Shorts or standard?

What ages are attracted to what platform and in what numbers?

That's the statistic that correlates more with the simplistic left/right description.

TikTok and Shorts format force feeds clips and promotes the production of reaction clips. Youtube offers entire debates.

Totally different audiences.

I'd also add that what she considers "social media influencers" should not be conflated with dedicated independent news.

Again, two different species.

Which is why putin was able to take down the USA without firing a shot.
Morons don't understand the value of being a professional journalist with editorial supervision.
#4 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2024-11-20 04:41 PM | Reply | Flag:| Newsworthy 1

The professionals paid on main stream media are very supervised.

That's a reason the Amsterdam terrorism was framed as anti-Semitism.

Amateurs did a far better job capturing footage, obtaining interviews and displaying the evidence that MSM are lying about.

We can also study Gaza, but not on televised news.

That may be inspired by the intelligence apparatus controlling editors, anchors and producers?

Clips from TikTok and Shorts are generally not adequate to describe as journalism, so I wouldn't qualify them as such.

From my understanding Russia has a very captured news media, very similarly controlled as the United States does.

I have yet to see the retractions on the Dutch man being beaten in the streets by Israeli that was framed backwards by every single news source.

I can find that information on independent news.

Place blame with all corporate media.

How much money did Miriam Adleson gift Trump?

How much did Kamala rake in from foreign media owners? Or even "domestic"?

Obama didn't want pesky press briefings riddled with questions.

They report what they are paid to.

Access for existence.

Thus, Leon crashing Twitter - too many "critical independents".