The Left Targets Social Media -- And The Daily Wire -- For Destruction | Ep. 1299
|
Time
Text
President Biden accuses Facebook of killing people by allowing too much free speech.
And taxpayer-funded NPR targets The Daily Wire for destruction.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
Stand up for your digital rights.
Take action at expressvpn.com.
Slash Ben.
We'll get to all the news in just one moment.
And much news there is first.
Let us remind you that the federal government is about to inflate the currency away.
This is a thing that is going to happen over the course of time, but it does mean you should be diversified into assets other than the United States dollar.
And one of the ways that you do this is by protecting yourself with investment in precious metals.
Now is the time to declare your independence for your savings.
Cut your ties to the US dollar.
Invest in gold and silver.
With Birch Gold Group.
If you haven't reached out to Birch Gold yet to diversify part of your IRA or 401k into a Precious Metals IRA, do it today.
Text Ben to 474747.
Get a free information kit on protecting your savings with gold.
I buy my gold from Birch Gold.
We've got an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, countless five-star reviews, over 10,000 happy customers.
Talk to them.
Have them help you safeguard your investments.
Text Ben to 474747 to claim your free information kit and to speak with a Precious Metals expert on holding gold and silver in a tax-sheltered account.
Again, text Ben to 474747 to get started.
Protect your savings today.
If you're a responsible investor, you know that relying on the United States dollar while this administration blows it out is a bad idea.
Instead, invest a little bit into gold and silver by texting Ben to 474747 and getting started with my friends over at Birch Gold.
Alrighty, so we are now in the midst of a great move from the federal government led by the White House, aided and abetted and fostered by the establishment media to shut down your access to information you want to see.
It is that simple.
What we are watching right now is an overt.
I mean, it's right there in the public eye.
It's an overt collusion between the establishment media, which wishes to reestablish its monopoly over informational dissemination, between the media and the Democratic Party, which would like you to only see the crap that the mainstream media is often pushing, And social media, whom both of the aforementioned parties are now going to push into shutting down your access to information.
So to understand how this works, you have to sort of understand briefly the history of how informational dissemination has happened in the United States.
So if you go all the way back, the way people used to get their information at the very beginning of the Republic was a bunch of different partisan papers, and people would subscribe to them, pick them up.
They were largely local.
And they were pretty openly partisan.
There's a reason why, for example, the Arizona Republic was sort of a Republican paper.
There's a reason why the Arkansas Democrat Gazette was the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, right?
The fact is that you would have all these newspapers and they would have their various partisan spins.
And that's just the way that it was.
Then in the 1920s, there was this move to sort of regularize journalism.
And the idea here is that journalism was a process, right?
You had to have double sourcing, for example.
You had to make sure that every Factual claim that you made was objectively verifiable.
And that's not a bad thing.
But it led to the rise of a professional so-called journalist class, which would be fine if they were actually just professionals following a process the way that scientists are supposed to follow the scientific process.
Instead, what this led to was the rise of a cadre of self-described journalists who are supposedly better at this than anybody else.
And they stopped doing journalism.
They went back to being partisans, but they just didn't tell you.
And so for years, for decades in the United States, as the media began to nationalize, as the means of transportation became better, and the means of communication became better, there was a new mode of informational distribution, and it was like TV.
There were only three networks, ABC, NBC, CBS.
That was it.
And everybody got their news at night from these three networks.
As far as major newspapers, there were only a few that were nationally disseminated.
It was like the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post.
That was pretty much it.
And so everybody got their information from these very narrow bandwidths of information, right?
These very narrow means of distribution.
Then came the internet and it exploded all of this.
The internet basically allowed anybody to put up news.
It was almost a reversion to the origins of the Republic.
It wasn't local, it was national, but you could go to a wide variety of websites, you could check a wide variety of perspectives, and there was this really rich sort of interplay between how people were writing, it was in the very early days of the internet.
Then there was the rise of social media, and social media, as is so often the case, was supposed to facilitate all of this and now has put it in danger.
Social media was supposed to give you a one-stop shop for doing all of this.
Instead of you having to bookmark 10 pages, if you're older than about 18 years old, you know that this is how people used to do things, right?
You'd have a list of bookmarks on the side of your web browser, and then every morning, you would check, like the New York Times, the Jerusalem Post, you'd check the Washington Post, and you would check National Review.
You'd be able to check all of these things, right?
Via the bookmarks.
Then Facebook, because it aggregated so many eyeballs, because so many people were using Facebook, for example, they've started providing a newsfeed.
And the news feed was supposed to basically make bookmarks obsolete.
When was the last time you used a bookmark?
Nobody uses bookmarks on the internet anymore because instead they have this curated list of things that they read.
And that curated list is curated by social media.
It's curated by Facebook.
It's curated by, for example, Twitter, by your Twitter feed.
So the idea here was that it was supposed to be easier for you to access all the information you wanted to see.
The problem was that whereas before, because you were the person who was clicking on all the bookmarks, you were in control of the stuff that you were seeing.
Having handed control of that over to Facebook or to Twitter for purposes of basically ease, right?
You didn't want to click 10 buttons.
Instead, you click one and then you just watch the scroll.
Now, the Democrats and the media have seen that as all information and informational distribution is re-narrowed into these narrow bandwidths, instead of everybody getting their news from a wide variety of sources, now you get your news, quote-unquote, from Facebook, and then you click through, right?
Once they saw that everybody had to go through Facebook, they realized they could reestablish the monopoly.
All they would have to do is simply say to Facebook that Facebook was guilty of deep and abiding sin if they allowed you to see the information you wanted to see.
Twitter needed to suppress information that you were not supposed to see.
It was very important that if you liked information too much that the mainstream media and the Democrats didn't like, that these social media platforms, instead of easing your ability to see information, restrict your ability to see information.
So the entire rationale for these social medias, the social media networks being in the news business in the first place got reversed.
Instead of them making it easier for you to access information, Democrats in the media, seeing that you were now using them almost universally, they decided this is a great way of ensuring that you don't see information.
This is a great way of purging these particular outlets of the information, restricting your ability to see them, shadow banning, Preventing advertising.
They could reestablish their traditional monopoly by using these giant companies.
They're going to leverage these giant companies into doing what they wanted.
And so you have this bizarre spectacle of the media who are supposed to be the great defenders of a free press.
I've never called for CNN to lose its license.
I've never called for the New York Times' distribution on Facebook to be reduced because I don't care.
It's not my job.
But these other outlets will do that.
CNN will do that about Fox News.
The New York Times will do that about The Daily Wire.
NPR will do that about The Daily Wire, as we'll see.
The idea from these folks is only they should be giving you information.
And if information is obtained from any place else, then Facebook has done something deeply wrong.
And they will be the judges of what is good information and what is not good information.
And the Biden administration is very into this.
This is authoritarian nonsense.
It is authoritarian.
They have a book coming out next week called The Authoritarian Moment.
It is all about this.
I mean, the timing couldn't be better.
It is all about this.
It is about the attempt.
By the media and the Democratic Party using social media to abort your ability to see the information that you want to see in authoritarian fashion.
It is ugly and you should be worried about it whether you're on the right or on the left or in the center.
You should be worried about it regardless because guess what?
This game goes both ways.
If there were a Republican in office who were saying that Facebook should restrict information from the New York Times, the media would be going ape bleep.
But because the media are complicit in this now, the media are the greatest weapon against free speech happening in the country right now.
The Democratic Party are fully participatory in this because they must have utopia and they will do it at the price of your ability to access information.
It is hideous.
We'll get to more of this in just one second because we can see it in practice and it is very clear now.
First, let us talk about being a responsible human being.
So you need the insurance that you need.
You need life insurance if you're a responsible person.
You also need home and auto insurance.
By law, if you want to drive around, you need auto insurance, but you're probably not getting the best price on any of this stuff.
PolicyGenius makes it easy to compare home and auto insurance in one place.
They can help you find home and auto coverage similar to what you have now, but at a lower price.
They've saved customers an average of $1,250 per year over what they were paying for home and auto insurance.
Their team will handle the paperwork to set up your new policy or switch over your current one.
Getting started is super simple.
First, head on over to PolicyGenius.com slash ShapiroHome and answer a few quick questions about yourself and your property.
Then, PolicyGenius takes it from there.
They'll compare rates from America's top insurers from Progressive to Allstate to find your lowest quotes.
The PolicyGenius team can look for ways to save you more, including bundling your home and auto policies.
If they find a better rate than what you're paying now, they will switch you over for free.
Their top-notch service has earned PolicyGenius thousands of five-star reviews across Trustpilot and Google.
Head on over to PolicyGenius.com slash ShapiroHome to get started right now.
PolicyGenius.
When it comes to insurance, it's nice and very important to get it right.
Okay, so once again, to understand the origins of the new anti-social media push, the attempt to use social media, As a way of restricting informational flow.
You have to understand there was a tremendous reversal that happened with regard to left-wing views of social media directly after 2016.
So when Trump won in 2016...
The social media before that was considered this godsend.
You'll recall that there were articles in 2012 about the brilliant use of social media by the Obama administration and the Obama team in the 2012 election.
What an amazing job they had done in using social media to reach the people they wanted to reach.
And Facebook was a tool for this.
You'll remember Facebook was a tool in the Arab Spring.
Facebook was a way for Oppressed and suppressed people all over the world to get out their message.
Then, Trump won.
And suddenly, the Democrats, deeply in need of some sort of narrative to explain away Trump's win, instead of just saying Hillary Clinton was a horrific candidate, which is why she lost, instead of doing that, the media and the Democrats latched onto a narrative.
The narrative was, Facebook, Twitter, your social media brethren, all of these giant companies, they were responsible.
And the way they were responsible is they had not properly policed themselves for things like Russian disinformation.
Right?
Russian disinformation.
This stuff was super dangerous.
Now, here's the thing.
The Russians did try to intervene in the 2016 election.
Their actual activity on Facebook, if you read into the Senate reports, does not even chart in terms of important things that happened with regard to social media in 2016.
Like, the actual amount of attention their posts were getting was actually low, if you know the metrics.
But, that doesn't matter.
The narrative had been set, and the narrative was that these social media outlets were being used as props by cutouts, essentially, from foreign countries.
Then something subtle happened.
All of these informational outlets, members of the media, the Democrats, they shifted the argument from it's Russian disinformation, meaning actual agitprop put out by a foreign government in order to pervert an American election, which is actually dangerous, and which should be prevented on social media.
They moved from that to, from disinformation, to, they just switched one letter, misinformation.
Misinformation was anything Democrats didn't like.
Now, social media had to step in and prevent misinformation.
Not disinformation, right?
Disinformation is an actual term that is used in the intelligence community to talk about a foreign government subsidizing Agiprop.
Misinformation can mean anything.
Misinformation can mean the Hunter Biden story a month before the election.
Misinformation can mean that you don't think Anthony Fauci did a good job during this pandemic.
Misinformation can be nearly anything so long as the media call it misinformation and then call on the federal government to pressure Facebook into preventing its dissemination.
You can basically leverage Facebook into doing whatever you want, right?
The shift from disinformation to misinformation is deeply important.
At the beginning, the social media tech bros, they were kind of resistant to this.
They said, yeah, we'd have to do a better job with Russian disinformation, but the reality is that we are platforms, right?
And as platforms, it is not our job to go around trying to discern true from false in a variety of public settings.
We're literally a platform in the same way that like your phone line is a platform, right?
When you get on your phone line, And you tell your wife that you'll remember everything at the grocery store and then you don't.
That does not make the phone line responsible for you saying something untrue to your wife.
Facebook is not responsible.
I mean, legally or morally, they are not responsible for people saying things that are untrue.
And certainly they're not responsible for a subjective claim that some people think is true and some people think is false.
And at the beginning, Facebook kind of acknowledged this, right?
Many of social media's heads would say, yeah, we're not responsible for that.
Freedom of speech requires that we allow opinions that we may not like and allow dissemination of information that you may think is false.
But it's actually arguable, and we need to have conversations over.
And then over time, as the Democrats pressed, you started to see social media react to the press.
They started to react to this.
This started last year, particularly during the pandemic, when social media started cracking down on people who suggested, for example, that the Chinese lab leak theory was correct.
They started saying, you can't disseminate that.
That's false.
You can't put that out there.
I started saying about COVID, that if you have, if you put out any material on COVID, if you say, for example, that lockdowns have not been particularly effective, which they have not been by all available scientific data, if you say that, that could be a serious problem.
You might get a strike from YouTube.
You might have Facebook restrict your informational dissemination.
If you say on some platforms that a man is a man and a woman is a woman, now, all of a sudden, you could see social media crack down on you.
I know people.
There's a feminist named Megan Murphy, for example, who was kicked off Twitter for the great sin of saying that a man was a man and a woman was a woman.
He started to see the shift from disinformation to misinformation actually activated inside social media.
And now it's coming to a head.
Now it's coming to a head because Joe Biden, the White House, the media believe that this is their shot to consolidate power forever.
They believe that their shot at consolidating power requires a crackdown on informational dissemination.
The lever that they will use is they will say that social media are not just bad.
They're not just providing you a space to put out things that are false.
They are killing people, right?
This is always the Democrat and media excuse for cracking down on your freedoms is that you're quote unquote killing people.
This is why the far left has decided that words are violence, that speech is violence.
We have to stop it.
If we don't stop it, people will die.
And if people will die, then we must use all the weapons at our disposal to prevent that.
And that may include suppression of some of your freedoms.
And it will certainly include pressuring these social media companies into shutting down the flow of information.
This is the exact argument that Joe Biden is now making with regard to COVID.
It is despicable and it is authoritarian and it is garbage.
Again, I'm going to pitch my book, The Authoritarian Moment.
Shameless plug right there because it is all about this.
How the left is weaponizing America's institutions.
If you want the country to fall apart, if you want us not to be able to have conversations, this is precisely the way to do it.
But this is not about having a conversation.
This is about shutting down a conversation.
From people who are very much afraid that you might get your information from a place they do not approve.
They don't just want to be quote-unquote journalistic gatekeepers who prevent untruth.
They want to be gatekeepers of content who prevent you from seeing anything you don't like.
Period.
End of story.
This is their goal.
I'll explain more in just one second.
First, let's talk about the fact that if you are hiring at your company, sometimes it can be rough to find the right people.
You need zip recruiter.
If you're a business owner who's hiring, you probably face a lot of challenges when it comes to finding the right person for your role, especially right now.
It's difficult out there for an employer seeking a great workforce.
That's why hiring can feel like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
Sure, you could post your job to some job board, but then all you can do is hope the right person comes along.
That's why you should try ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com.
When you post a job on ZipRecruiter, it gets sent out to over 100 top job sites with just one click.
Then, ZipRecruiter's matching technology finds people with the right skills and experience for your job and actively invites them to apply.
In fact, ZipRecruiter is so effective that 4 out of 5 employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the very first day.
It's no wonder.
Over 2.3 million businesses have come to ZipRecruiter for their hiring needs.
So, while other companies overwhelm you with way too many options, ZipRecruiter finds you what you're looking for, the needle in the haystack.
Right now, you can try ZipRecruiter for free at this web address, ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.
Once again, remember, ziprecruiter.com slash d-a-i-l-y-w-i-r-e.
ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
Okay, so, the crackdown on social media requires some sort of hook.
The hook here is, you're killing people.
Social media is killing people.
So Joe Biden, supposed moderate, supposed unifying force in America, supposed respecter of traditional American rights.
On Friday, he said one of the more egregious things that I've heard a president say in quite a long time, that includes President Trump.
Joe Biden gets out there and he says that Facebook is responsible for killing people.
Facebook.
What's your message to platforms like Facebook?
They're killing people.
I mean, it really... Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated.
And they're killing people.
Okay, Facebook is a platform.
Facebook is not killing people.
That's an absurd contention.
And for the President of the United States to say that about a platform for dissemination of information is patently insane.
It's the equivalent of saying that the phone line is killing people.
Because, you know, sometimes people make drug deals on phone lines and then somebody brings the drugs over and somebody ODs.
That is AT&T's fault.
That's an insane contention.
It's wild and it's ridiculous and it's crazy.
And the reason he is saying it is because he would like to suppress your ability to access information that you want.
Now, none of this is a defense of people who actually put out false information.
Two things can be true at once.
One, it is not Facebook's job to determine what is shaded information and what is debatable information and what Joe Biden thinks is true, as we will determine in a second.
It turns out that half the crap that Democrats have said over the past year about this pandemic is not true, like overtly not true.
And that it turns out that vaccine hesitancy is in large part due to the vacillating nature of the Democratic response and the Biden administration response to this virus and to the vaccines.
And by the way, you're not going to get more people to vaccinate if you tell them explicitly, if you're explicitly saying that you are not allowed to see debated information and make up your own mind, but instead Joe Biden's going to tell you what to do.
You think more people are going to vaccinate because of that?
Truly?
You think that's going to be an effective tactic, given the fact that people don't trust Joe Biden on this anyway, and people certainly don't trust the establishment media?
When he says that Facebook is killing people, what he means is that there are people who put out bad information about vaccines on Facebook.
Guess what?
People put out bad information about, say, calling people Jim Crow racist for opposing voter ID on Facebook.
Should that be suppressed as well?
This is not Facebook's job.
If you wish people to believe the truth about vaccines, make the argument.
This show, I personally, we're about as pro-vaccine as it is possible to be.
I was calling on everybody to get the vaccine before Joe Biden was.
I was saying that it was the pathway to unmasking well before the Biden administration was.
So this is not about pro versus anti-vaccine.
The notion that Joe Biden gets to dictate to Facebook what information is put on the platform is despicable.
He's the president of the United States.
There is an amendment to the Constitution, the very first one, and it says that freedom of the press and freedom of speech are guaranteed.
It is not the job of the federal government to determine whether quote-unquote false or true information is put out on private platforms that were literally designed to be, again, platforms.
Hey, by the way, imagine he weren't saying this about Facebook.
Imagine he were saying this about the New York Times.
I'm old enough to remember, because I'm more than two years old, when Donald Trump was saying that the New York Times was fake news, and everybody in the media said that it was a threat to freedom of the press.
He didn't even say they should be suppressed.
He didn't say that they should be put out of business.
If he did, it was because Donald Trump said wild stuff all the time.
Nobody took that seriously.
But if you say this about social media, in the Democratic Party and in the media, You are considered good.
It is an active good.
Right?
Shutting down Facebook is apparently of no threat at all.
You know why?
Because the media are rooting for Facebook to just become the disseminators of the New York Times and the Washington Post and ABC News and NBC and CBS.
That is what they're looking for.
They're looking for a re-establishment of the media monopoly on the back of the lie that the real reason for lack of vaccinations is because of Facebook.
There are people who are responsible for putting out bad information and those people are wrong and they're doing something bad.
It is not Facebook's job to be the giant god that sits above all informational distribution and does these things at the behest of the Biden administration which by the way has lied about a thousand times on issues related to the vaccine and vacillated about a thousand times on issues related to the vaccine from whether schools should be reopening To how vaccines should be handed out on the basis of quote-unquote equity.
To whether you can unmask after you're vaccinated.
That's just stuff that's happened in the last like four months.
Okay, but this is the push, right?
So Jen Psaki doubles down on this.
She says that people should be banned from all social media for spreading misinformation.
Now remember, misinformation, not Russian disinformation.
Misinformation.
And she's not specific about what misinformation constitutes.
This is where things get messy.
Because if you made the argument that somebody put out a statement, let's say the statement said vaccines are utterly ineffective, they do nothing, right?
That is a false statement.
There are terms of service that prevent you from doing that on most of these major social media outlets.
But if you say, for example, that there are still open questions with regard to the use of vaccines in children, which there most certainly are, If you say that, is that misinformation?
It depends on the White House's perspective that day.
If they wish to push vaccines to children, then the answer is, sure, that's misinformation.
That should be curbed.
And if they don't, then presumably that gets to live.
If you've got the White House dictating what people can and cannot see, that is a violation of the First Amendment, even if they are leveraging private companies into doing it.
Here is Jen Psaki trying to push this.
Steps that could be constructive for the public health of the country are providing for Facebook or other platforms to measure and publicly share the impact of misinformation on their platform and the audience it's reaching, also with the public.
With all of you, to create robust enforcement strategies that bridge their properties and provide transparency about rules.
You shouldn't be banned from one platform and not others for providing misinformation out there.
So you should be having from all.
Does this sound like a centralization of power over freedom of dissemination of information to you?
And do you trust these people to decide what constitutes misinformation?
According to these people, the Steele dossier was not misinformation, even though it actually probably was Russian disinformation.
It was not misinformation, the Steele dossier, but the New York Post printing details about Hunter Biden's laptop was misinformation, according to these.
So you trust them to determine what information you can see?
This is a scary, scary thing that they are pushing, and it is the media who are complicit in it.
The media is worse than the government here.
We'll get to more of this in just one second.
First, let us talk about a simple fact.
You've got medical problems.
You should get the medical problem solved, right?
You shouldn't sit around and wait for the medical problem to solve itself.
It's very rare that it happens, particularly when you've got a life-affecting problem like erectile dysfunction.
With Roman, you can get a free online evaluation and ongoing care for ED All from the comfort and privacy of your home.
A U.S.
licensed healthcare professional will work with you to find the best treatment plan.
If medication is appropriate, it ships to you free with two-day shipping.
The whole process is straightforward and discreet.
Getting started is simple.
Just go to GetRoman.com slash Ben.
Complete an online visit today.
Take care of your ED without leaving your home.
Complete an online visit today to connect with a healthcare professional and get it taken care of.
Go to GetRoman.com slash Ben right now.
You'll get 15 bucks off your very first month.
It's really time to take care of your ED.
Remember, get started today.
You'll save $15 on your first order of ED treatment.
Again, medical issues, they can really wreck your life.
Why not just go get them solved?
You can do it quickly and discreetly and inexpensively at getroman.com slash ben.
You'll get 15 bucks off your first month of coverage right now.
G-E-T-R-O-M-A-N dot com slash ben right now.
Alrighty, so, it is not merely that the government is now actively pushing social media to restrict the flow of information.
Do you trust them to do this?
Even if you agree with them on vaccines, do you trust them to do this broadly?
And do you think they're going to restrict this to vaccines?
As you will see, the answer here is pretty obviously no.
It's the media too.
And this is where the pathetic self-interest of media members, the pathetic, ridiculous anger at the fact that people don't want to watch CNN, but do want to watch shows like this one.
Get over yourselves.
Seriously, get over yourselves.
These ridiculous jackass members of the New York Times editorial board.
These ridiculous people who work for MSNBC and CNN and who suggest that it should be the job of government to sit over social media and to tell social media when to take down information and not to take down information.
How are you not threatened by this?
Are you so short-sighted that you don't see how this will be used against you eventually?
That if you cross the government, the government will cross you?
Do you not see that once you've set up this iron matrix between the Between the mainstream media or establishment media and the Democratic Party and social media to suppress information.
Don't you see how that could flip very easily the other way?
How if a Republican gets elected president and then you've got right-wing media sources who say that there is disinformation on the platforms and they should use all aspects of power to suppress that quote-unquote disinformation or misinformation.
Don't you see how that can be used against you?
But you don't care.
You don't care because you believe that this is your tool for forever power.
You believe, and you're correct.
At CNN, your ratings are gone.
And so it is your job to make sure that nobody else is able to disseminate information.
You over at the New York Times, yes, you've increased your subscriptions because you kept saying Trump over and over and over again for several years now.
But you guys are afraid that online platforms like mine are coming after you.
And so you're very happy to watch Facebook, quote unquote, suppress information, even though You're talking about suppressing information that has nothing to do with falsity.
We'll see this in just one second.
Okay, the sanguinity, the perfect comfortableness of members of the media pushing suppression of information boggles the mind.
The founders never would have conceived of this.
If the founders had known that the greatest expositors of suppression of freedom of information would be members of the press, it would have blown their minds.
It would have blown their minds.
It really is an amazing thing.
The founders, they got so many things right, but there are a few things that they got wrong.
One is, they thought, for example, members of Congress would be so ambitious to keep their own power, they would never cede power to the executive branch.
Wrong.
Members of Congress decided long ago that their job was going to be to vote on omnibus packages, kick everything over to the executive branch, and avoid culpability and responsibility to their own citizens back home.
So that was a mistake.
The founders thought that ambition would be the real problem.
It turns out cowardice was the real problem.
When it comes to the press, the founders felt that when it came to freedom of the press, the threat would come from government.
They didn't think the threat was going to come from inside the house working with the government.
They felt that journalists would at least have enough temerity to stand up for fellow members of the press.
And if members of the press were being targeted by an administration, That the other members of the press would stand up and say no.
But they didn't believe, presumably, that the members of the press would be actively cheerleading the suppression of information via social media.
But that's exactly what's happening right now.
There was an entire CNN panel yesterday in which the panelists were arguing on CNN, right again, an establishment media news network.
They were arguing that Facebook and social media are polluting the informational environment, polluting it.
Again, Facebook is not the polluter.
Facebook is the river.
If there are people who are polluting that environment, it's not Facebook's fault any more than it's the river's fault if somebody puts out bad information.
And if you want to target misinformation, then target the source of the misinformation.
But this notion that the river itself is responsible for the pollution is nuts.
Doesn't matter.
People on CNN were pushing this.
I actually took the time to read Dr. Vivek Murthy's report today, the Surgeon General, and I think it will stand up the way the Surgeon General's report in 1962 did about pollution being bad for our health.
In 1964, the Surgeon General issued a report about how smoking is bad for our health.
Well, Facebook is bad for our health.
They're polluting the information No, conservatives do not agree with the critique that Paul Begala just made.
many conservatives agree with this. They're always complaining about big tech. But this is critically important.
No, conservatives do not agree with the critique that Paul Bogholland just made. Their criticism of big tech is that big tech has become a tool of the establishment media and the government.
Because you're saying this sort of stuff actively, right?
Mika Brzezinski and Danny Deutsch did the same routine.
Facebook has blood on its hands.
Again, the goal here is to... There's a reason why they are directing most of their fire not at the people they actually hate, right?
They're not directing most of their fire at, say, Daily Wire or at Fox News.
First of all, they can't with regard to Daily Wire and vaccine issues because we are very pro-vaccine generally over at the Daily Wire.
But even if we weren't, they're not directing their fire there.
They are directing their fire where they think it is most likely to be responded to.
They're directing their pressure campaign at the people most likely to collapse, namely the corporate heads of places like Facebook who tend to be somewhat sympathetic to the left-wing position and also are very much afraid of regulation by them.
It's amazing, right?
They're not directing their fire at the people with whom they actually disagree.
They're directing their fire at people they know they can control.
That's the reason they're attacking Facebook.
That's the reason that they're attacking social media.
Because if they can just use Facebook as their tool, then they can strangle the alternative media in the crib.
That's the goal.
Emeka Brzezinski and Donny Deutsch doing just that yesterday.
How dare they still allow this to happen?
So you want one simple thing?
I don't care.
You're putting up their response.
I don't care what their response is.
They can do more.
They are in the trillions as far as their network.
Shame on them.
They have blood on their hands.
I want to say it again.
Specifically, call out two people, Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg.
You run the company.
If I ran that company, if I was Mark Zuckerberg and I'm worth $100 billion, I don't know, I might go into my pocket a little bit if I can save some lives.
Shame on you.
I stand with you on that, Donnie.
Of course you do.
Of course you do!
Because you guys are partisan Democrats.
And your goal is to pressure Facebook into suppressing not just information about COVID, but any information you don't like.
So Facebook, by the way, put out a ton of notes.
It's amazing that this is happening right now.
I mean, we have information.
You remember Dr. Fauci's emails?
In those emails was an email from Mark Zuckerberg to Dr. Fauci specifically asking him how they could work together to suppress what they call the misinformation on COVID.
So Facebook was working with the government on this sort of stuff.
It doesn't matter.
That's not the goal.
The goal is not to stop misinformation.
The goal is to exercise dramatic top-down control over all information that the left does not like.
They're not, again, they're not hiding the ball on this.
This is not some sort of giant conspiracy.
They're saying it directly out in the open.
Facebook, by the way, said, quote, the fact that more than 2 billion people have viewed authoritative information about COVID-19 and vaccines on Facebook, which is more than any other place on the Internet.
More than 3.3 million Americans have also used our vaccine finder tool to find out where and how to get a vaccine.
The facts show Facebook is helping save lives, period.
That's true.
That's actively true.
But it doesn't matter.
And the goal is broader than this.
It is not about COVID.
It is not about vaccines.
The goal is much broader than this.
Here's the Surgeon General of the United States saying that social media needs to be doing more.
Again, it's social media's fault.
It's not your own garbage positioning on the vaccine.
It's not your own vacillation and flip-flopping on the vaccine.
It's not your failures to roll this thing out properly.
It's not the fact that the federal government withdrew the Johnson & Johnson vaccine from the market after six cases.
We saw misinformation flowing around COVID-19 from the beginning.
And we've raised those concerns to these companies.
And I've spoken about my concerns about misinformation publicly numerous times over the last many months.
The only thing that matters is top-down control.
Here's the Surgeon General of the United States forwarding that.
We saw misinformation flowing around COVID-19 from the beginning.
And we've raised those concerns to these companies.
And I've spoken about my concerns about misinformation publicly numerous times over the last many months.
My concern is that we're not seeing nearly enough progress here.
And that's one of the reasons I issued this advisory.
It's not entirely about the tech companies.
I issued this advisory to call the entire country to action, recognizing there are steps all of us can take.
Technology companies have an important role, particularly when it comes to being transparent with the public about how much misinformation is flowing on their sites.
Okay, and then the great and sainted Dr. Fauci, he goes even further.
So the great and sainted Dr. Fauci, the greatest doctor in America after Dr. Jill Biden, he goes on CNN with Jim Acosta, and ladies, find you a gentleman who loves you like Jim Acosta loves Jim Acosta.
And he informs people that if there had been social media during the eradication of smallpox and polio, then they never would have been eradicated.
And as we'll talk about in just one second, that's not true.
I mean, it's just factually untrue.
But here is Dr. Fauci spouting untruth.
That's okay.
He's allowed.
If you look at the extraordinary historic success in eradicating smallpox and eliminating polio for most of the world, and we're on the brink of eradicating polio, if we had had the pushback
For vaccines, the way we're seeing on certain media, I don't think it would have been possible at all to not only eradicate smallpox, we probably would still have smallpox and we probably would still have polio in this country if we had the kind of false information that's being spread now.
Okay, so I'll explain why this is completely false.
Okay, a couple of reasons.
One, smallpox is a disease that kills about 30% of the people who get it.
If COVID were killing 30% of the people who get it, do you think there would be any vaccine hesitancy?
The answer is pretty clearly no, right?
Smallpox wiped out like one third of the continent of Europe over the course of the dark ages, right?
Like this notion that smallpox, people would have been like, oh man, I'm so vaccine hesitant.
This vaccine is probably more dangerous than the smallpox.
You know how dangerous smallpox was?
Smallpox was so dangerous that it allowed for the first actual vaccination process to take place.
Because think about how crazy this is.
The way they used to create vaccines is they would literally take the blood from a person who had had smallpox, and then they would inject it in another person in the hope that the antibodies would transfer.
They would take the smallpox from one person and give it to another person, and hope the body would fight off the weaker strain.
And people did this voluntarily.
By the way, if you want to actually see it in action, then watch the HBO series, John Adams, right?
Where people were doing the first inoculations as early as like the late 18th century, early 19th century.
People were willing to do that because smallpox was so dangerous.
If COVID were as dangerous as smallpox, I promise you, vaccine hesitancy would be a lot lower.
You know how I know this?
Because look at the vaccine rates among people who are over age 65.
People over age 65 have vaxxed up at like a 90% rate.
Why?
Because that's where the most of the danger from COVID lives, right?
Okay, so this notion that it's about social media as opposed to risk assessment by individuals is completely wrong.
Now, again, my assessment is that if you are above the age of 21, you have a better shot of dying from COVID than you do of having a serious effect from the vaccine, right?
So you should go get the vaccine.
And for people who are 12 to 18, it seems like that is also true.
It is not clear that it's true for kids, right?
So that's the best information about the vaccine at this time.
However, People can do their own risk assessments on this sort of thing, particularly since the mRNA vaccine is so unbelievably effective.
Now, as to polio, it's kind of amazing that we've forgotten this, but the first vaccine rollout for polio was a complete botchery.
It was rolled out originally in 1955.
In 1955, there's a great piece over at theconversation.com called The Great Polio Vaccine Mess and the Lessons It Holds About Federal Coordination for Today's COVID-19 Vaccination Effort by a guy named Bert Spector, who's an associate professor of international business and strategy at the D.M. Moore McKim School of Business in Northeastern University.
He points out that immediately following the government licensing of the Salk vaccine, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis contracted with private drug companies for about $9 million worth of vaccine.
About 90% of the stock they planned to provide it free to the country's first and second graders.
But just two weeks after the first doses were administered, the Public Health Service reported six inoculated children had come down with polio.
And the number of such incidents grew, because it turned out there'd been a botchery.
A lab had actually not released weakened polio strains in order to generate immunity, they'd actually released basically adulterated doses of the vaccine that included polio.
So kids were actually being given polio in the original iteration of the vaccine rollout, or at least a certain percentage were.
Says this professor, after considerable fumbling and outright denial, Surgeon General Leonard Steele pulled all tainted vaccine off the market.
Then, less than a month after the initial inoculations, the U.S.
shut down distribution entirely.
It was not until the introduction of a new polio vaccine in 1960, created by Albert Sabin, that public trust returned.
So it took five years.
So was that because of social media or what?
Are you also going to blame social media for that?
So again, it is not about preventing people from getting bad information about vaccines so much as it is about exercising top-down control.
That's really what it's about because the Biden administration, they make no bones about this.
They're just sources.
They don't want to see disseminated information.
I'm very much against vaccine misinformation.
And if you post something that is overtly false, then it should come down.
But if you are posting stuff that is arguable, if you are posting stuff that is based in theoretical discussion, if you are posting theories about COVID lab leaks, why would I possibly trust this government to determine what is true and what is false about all of this stuff?
I mean, the same people who are now declaring that they ought to be the single greatest verifiers of information were providing misinformation about the vaccine from the beginning.
I mean, you've got Kamala Harris now on board with all this.
It was Kamala Harris who way back when was saying you shouldn't get the vaccine if it was developed under the Trump administration.
Here is Kamala Harris not all that long ago.
This was during the campaign.
Let's just say there's a vaccine that is approved and even distributed before the election.
Would you get it?
Well, I think that's going to be an issue for all of us.
I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump.
And it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he's talking about.
I will not take his word for it.
He wants us to inject bleach.
No, I will not take his word.
By the way, Joe Biden was saying the exact same thing.
Joe Biden was saying, you know, any process that's done under Trump, I'm not sure I trust that process.
Americans have had to endure President Trump's incompetence and dishonesty.
When it comes to testing and personal protective equipment, we can't afford to repeat those fiascos.
When it comes to a vaccine, when it occurs, the stakes are too high.
American families have already suffered and sacrificed too much.
So let me be clear.
I trust vaccines.
I trust scientists, but I don't trust Donald Trump.
OK, so that was that.
Who's purveying misinformation at that point?
Who?
And yet these are the people who say they should be in charge of all informational distribution.
And again, it's not just about COVID.
It's not.
I'll get to that in just one second.
It is not just about COVID.
It is about control of all the information you see.
This is the goal.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, let's talk about leading a healthier life.
A healthier life doesn't mean sticking to someone else's strict rules.
It means having more knowledge to build smarter, more sustainable habits.
Noom's cognitive behavioral approach focuses on why, instead of what, to help you change your relationship with food.
Everybody's journey looks different.
Noom customizes a program for you based on your personal goals.
You may have noticed I'm looking a lot more svelte these days.
That's because I used Noom myself.
It is an excellent way to change your eating and exercise habits.
80% of Noom users finish the program.
Over 60% have stuck with their goals for at least a year.
With Noom, taking care of your health is empowering instead of stress-inducing.
No need to fear ruining the whole program with one day off.
Noom will help you get back on track.
All you need is 10 minutes a day.
Noom fits into your life on your terms.
No grueling early mornings or huge chunks out of your day.
Start building better habits for healthier long-term results.
Sign up for your trial at Noom.com slash Shapiro.
That is N-O-O-M dot com slash Shapiro.
I've used Noom.
My wife is a big recommender of Noom.
My parents have started using Noom.
It is an excellent way to change your daily habits so you lose weight, so you feel healthier.
That's what Noom is all about.
Sign up your trial with Noom.com today.
Alrighty, we're gonna get to the actual broader goal here, which again, has nothing to do with COVID and everything to do with control of informational dissemination on a broad level.
First, let me remind you, again, my newest book, The Authoritarian Moment, is coming on sale next Tuesday, July 27th.
It is the most important book of the day.
It is.
It goes through how all of our institutions have been weaponized against our freedoms, how they have been weaponized in order to cast you out into the cornfield, and more importantly, how we take back these institutions, which we must, because if we do not, if we do not neutralize institutions, they become weapons of the left, the country is basically finished.
As you're going to read, there's a lot happening right now, I predict it in this book.
Everything that's going on right now with the crackdown on social media, Everything from that to the perversion of our education system, it's all talked about in the book.
You'll want to pick up your copy of The Authoritarian Moment right now to get a sense of what's to come and how we can stop it.
Head on over to dailywire.com slash ben, order your signed copy today.
I truly think it's an important book, like very important, because again, No matter what industry you work in, no matter what industries you come into contact with, they're being re-normalized and weaponized by an active, motivated, authoritarian left.
I'll be doing a live stream book signing event next Tuesday the 27th.
Pre-order your signed copy today.
When you do, you'll be asked to type in a question at checkout.
Then catch Tuesday's live signing to see if I answer your question and watch me sign your book.
Get your copy at dailywire.com slash ben right now.
Now, the legacy media, it reeks of propaganda, shameless virtue signaling, blatantly disregarding the truth at every turn.
It's a complete breach of America's trust.
It's no wonder Americans have lost faith in those who are supposed to keep them informed.
At the same time, those news outlets dominate the stream of information reaching the American public.
Podcasting is no exception.
That is why.
We are bringing you something brand new.
It's called Morning Wire.
It's a daily news show.
It values your time and the truth.
Brought to you by Daily Wire editor-in-chief John Bickley and co-host Georgia Howe.
Morning Wire will wake you up with the latest developments in politics, sports, culture, education, all with a heavy emphasis on facts above all because they don't care about your feelings.
It is available today, like today.
You can get all your news here.
It's great.
It's available today.
Subscribe right now.
To Morning Wire on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, everywhere you listen to podcasts so you don't miss a beat.
If you like what you hear, leave a five-star review.
Help point fellow Americans in the direction of truth.
Thanks for listening.
Go check it out.
Morning Wire right now.
you're listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
I should just point out here that on a data level, when people say that Facebook is responsible for vaccine hesitancy, it's a lie.
It's just not true.
Okay?
And the notion that it is right-wing vaccine hesitancy that's causing the large-scale unvaccination that's happening in the country right now, here's the racial breakdown on vaccination in the United States.
Asian Americans are vaccinated at a 62% rate.
White Americans are vaccinated at a 47% rate.
Hispanic Americans are vaccinated at a 39% rate.
Black Americans are vaccinated at a 34% rate.
Is that because Black and Hispanic Americans are in huge numbers, huge, unprecedented numbers, watching Tucker Carlson's show?
Or because they are accessing bad vaccine information via Facebook?
Is that really what's going on here?
Is it because of evil, right-wing dissemination of information that must be cracked down upon by the Biden administration?
I have an article right here from the New York Post.
State data shows one-third of New York hospital workers are unvaccinated.
Who's responsible for that?
Maybe we need a crackdown on misinformation from the New York State government, because obviously they're doing something wrong.
One third of all health care workers in New York are still unvaccinated in New York City, which was like the epicenter of this thing.
More than nine months into the campaign to inoculate medical workers and all New Yorkers against the killer bug, nearly a third of staffers at Big Apple hospitals are still unvaccinated.
Those figures were compiled by the state health department.
They show nearly 40 percent of hospital staff across three boroughs have either refused or have not received their COVID-19 vaccines.
Even in hospital-heavy Manhattan, only 76% of workers were vaccinated, matching the statewide average.
That means one in four medical staffers are still unvaccinated.
Well, clearly, I mean, this is like the hotbed of right-wing activity that we've been told is responsible for the vast unvaccination of the American public.
Okay, so what is this really about?
What this is really about, the game is given away by Kara Swisher, who's been pushing for this crap forever.
Kara Swisher is one of the worst columnists in America.
She writes for the New York Times, and her sole goal for the past several years has been to push, prod, or beat the living hell out of Facebook into doing what she wants them to do.
Not just with regard to vaccines.
Vaccines are just her latest thing.
But with regard to everything.
She has a piece today titled, They're Killing People.
Biden isn't quite right, but he's not wrong.
It was a stunning thing to say, even if it is in many ways true.
They're killing people, President Biden said loudly enough to be heard under the roar of his Marine One helicopter idling on the South Lawn of the White House on Friday.
He was not talking about terrorists or leaders of rogue nations or even gun manufacturers.
He was talking Silicon Valley tech moguls, most specifically people like Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, the top two leaders of Facebook and their platform's role in allowing dangerous misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccines to spread far and wide.
The only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated.
They're killing people, he said.
Says the New York Times, this message has clearly been coordinated as tensions have increased between the Biden administration and Facebook particularly.
That had been signaled earlier in the week in a much less stark way by Jen Psaki, Biden's press secretary and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.
Psaki pointed to a public health crisis as a reason to pressure social media companies, which also face difficulty trying to balance concerns about protecting speech with the danger of some misinformation.
In an interview with me two weeks ago, says Kara Swisher, Biden's chief of staff, Ron Klain, also seemed to be laying the groundwork for putting the blame on Facebook for the administration not reaching its promised goal of 70 percent by July 4th.
As you might imagine, Facebook did not agree with the characterization.
The truth, says Kara Swisher, is that Facebook serves as a gateway to both, presenting clearly solid information about COVID, as well as a place where an enormous flood of lies about it has overwhelmed the same zone and for a much longer time.
Back in May of last year, for example, as noted in the New York Times, there was Plandemic, a 26-minute video alleging a secret group of powerful people were using the virus and the upcoming vaccines to make money and consolidate control over the world.
Now, here's a question.
If Plandemic had been outright banned by Facebook and Twitter and YouTube right from the beginning, what would have happened?
The film makers would have claimed they were being suppressed.
And do you think all the people who were ready to watch Plandemic were suddenly going to turn into pro-vaccine advocates?
I have serious doubts about that.
Here is Kara Swisher's conclusion, and this gives away the game.
She says, in this era, the media driver's seat is controlled here and worldwide by Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, which makes them an easy target for the Biden administration.
While one could just as easily cast aspersions at the blatantly false Jeremiah ads on Fox News, the reality is that you can't blame individuals either.
You can't resist social media juggernauts.
Attempting to stop falsehoods by claiming to offer good information is like using a single sandbag to hold back an impossibly fetid ocean.
It's like that when it comes to a range of once-anodyne, now-divisive issues, says Kara Swisher, from election integrity to critical race theory to whatever, keeping this country in a constant state of twitchy confusion.
Wherever it came from, it remains even more prescient.
Especially now, lives travel much faster thanks to Facebook.
Kara Swisher, that one sentence is the whole ballgame.
The whole ballgame.
It's not about COVID.
It's about all the issues.
Social media is bad because it allows you to access information Kara Swisher does not want you to see.
And so it must be cracked down upon.
And the press will push for it.
And the Democrats will push for it.
And now the White House will push for it.
This is authoritarian nonsense.
And you should be afraid of it if you're a freedom-loving human being.
By the way, it's now getting quite personal.
The fact is that NPR, a taxpayer-funded entity, has a piece deliberately now doing this.
So they can't claim that we are generating misinformation at Daily Wire about the COVID vaccine because we are not.
Again, I may be the most pro-vaccine host on the right.
My site does not print COVID misinformation.
We don't do it.
Okay, we've been pretty hawkish about COVID.
I'm in favor of people being able to make their own risk assessments based on the proper available information, much of which was suppressed by the Biden administration about, for example, the efficacy of the vaccines in the early days when Dr. Fauci was lying and telling you that wearing a mask was completely necessary even if you were vaccinated.
And then later he reversed himself, of course.
Okay, so NPR is now pushing.
Basically, NPR is going the rest of the way.
So NPR, a taxpayer-funded entity, is now pressuring Facebook to suppress Daily Wire and my Facebook page, especially and directly.
Why?
Not because we are presenting misinformation, but because we are conservative.
They're openly saying it.
It's right there.
Okay, quote.
Outrage as a business model?
How Ben Shapiro is using Facebook to build an empire.
Now, we've made no secret of the fact that Facebook, as a powerful social media outlet, is one of the places where we push for traffic, just as we do on Instagram, just as we do on YouTube, just as we do on Twitter, just like every company does on all of the major social media outlets.
But it's bad that we're succeeding, according to NPR.
That's the problem, and that must be stopped.
This is a case that's now being astroturfed by a wide variety of sources who have decided that Facebook is deeply embarrassed of the fact that they're suppressing information that we are successful.
We're not suppressing information that we're successful on Facebook or anywhere else.
Thank God a lot of people read our site.
Thank God a lot of people listen to the show and they have every right to do so.
And did it ever occur to NPR and the journalists who are so all-fire concerned about people viewing our content that they are acting like authoritarian idiots?
Did it ever occur to them that I have never said that NPR Should we foreclose the ability to disseminate information?
I think we should cut its funding.
I don't see why I ought to pay for the federal government to attack my site.
That seems weird.
I don't see why conservatives across the land, tens of millions of whom, access our content every month multiple times.
I don't see why exactly they should be funding NPR to attack the outlets they actually like to read and watch.
So NPR has this piece.
It's not about COVID misinformation.
It's about social media should shut down DailyWire because DailyWire is DailyWire.
Quote, The conservative podcast host and author's personal Facebook page has more followers than the Washington Post, and he drives an engagement machine unparalleled by anything else on the world's biggest social networking site.
An NPR analysis of social media data found that over the past year, stories published by the site Shapiro founded, The Daily Wire, received more likes, shares, and comments on Facebook than any other news publisher by a wide margin.
Even legacy news organizations that have broken major stories or produced groundbreaking investigative work don't come anywhere close.
Oh, are we hurting your feelings?
Are we hurting your feelings with the fact people like clicking on our headlines?
Is it hurtful to you that the New York Times, with its, honestly, like the most unreadable headlines in the news business aren't getting clicked upon?
Maybe you should write readable headlines that people give a crap about.
Maybe you should do that.
Or maybe the reason people are clicking on our site as opposed to the vast panoply of left-wing sites is because there are many, many left-wing sites and like two conservative sites.
Maybe that's the reason.
Or maybe the reason is because they don't trust you.
And your attempt to suppress information.
And so they click on us more because they don't trust you.
And they shouldn't trust you.
Because you're a bunch of overtly... Well, I should say covertly partisan.
I mean, it's clear.
You trying to play this game where we pretend like we don't see your bias is absurd.
Here's more of NPR.
Dailyware articles with headlines like, quote, book review, proof that wokeness is projection by nervous racist white women who can't talk to minorities without elaborate codes, regularly garner tens of thousands of shares for the site.
And Shapiro is turning that Facebook reach into a rapidly expanding, cost efficient media empire.
One that experts worry may be furthering polarization in the US.
Oh, my God.
Conservatives resist polarization.
See this is, it's so funny, this is how the left views polarization.
Polarization is usually when people unfairly attack one another and tell lies about each other.
Say like when the president of the United States says you're a Jim Crow segregationist because you like voter ID.
Like that would be furthering polarization.
But here's the thing, for the media, for the left, Their monopoly prevents polarization.
Because you see, there's no other point of view.
If it is unipolar, there is no polarization.
If there is only one pole, there can be no polarization, you see?
It's amazing.
If there's a monopoly on information and everyone agrees with each other, there's no polarization inside the monopoly.
But the moment Daily Wire exists, polarization.
It must be stopped.
Shut down Daily Wire.
Says NPR, again a taxpayer-funded entity, quote, There's a demand among certain subjects of the public for outrage politics, said Jamie Settle, the director of the Social Networks and Political Psychology Lab at the College of William & Mary in Virginia.
This happens on both the left and right, but the people who do this on the right have just found a lot more successful ways of doing it.
Have we?
Have we?
Because Joe Biden won 80 million votes on the basis that everyone who had disagreed with him was a threat to democracy, and he's still saying it.
The Daily Wire did not respond to interview requests from NPR for this story.
Yeah, you know why?
Because that's why.
You think I don't know your agenda before you start this crap?
We know your agenda the moment you email us as part of an astroturfed effort to force Facebook into stopping the dissemination of our website.
We know exactly what you're doing.
Everyone can see what you're doing.
You're the world's worst magicians.
Don't even misdirect with this hand.
You're just doing the trick right here.
Says NPR, the site produces very little original reporting.
Our investigative reporting team would beg to differ.
People like Luke Rosiak, who have been breaking stories from Loudoun County.
But instead, mostly repackages journalism from traditional news organizations with a conservative slant.
That alone wouldn't be newsworthy.
The circle of life online means information is written and rewritten in a seemingly infinite loop.
But, the daily wire has turned anger into an art form and recycled content into a business model.
Wait, so now the problem isn't that we're lying, and it's not that we're doing anything different from anybody else, it's that we're good at it.
Oops!
I'm so sorry.
Are we hurting your feelings?
Oh, poor NPR.
So sad.
Get out the world's tiniest violin.
In May, The Daily Wire generated more Facebook engagement on its articles than The New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC News, and CNN combined.
Yeah.
You know why?
Because we're good at our jobs.
And because you guys kind of suck, okay?
That's the reality.
People don't like your content, and so they click on the opposite content.
By the way, if you think the New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC News, and CNN are having media troubles in terms of, like, people clicking on their sites, this is a complete misread.
I promise you that all of the sites that you just mentioned have bigger traffic than we do overall.
Other conservative outlets like The Blaze, Breitbart News, and The Western Journal that publish aggregated and opinion content aimed at invoking outrage have also generally been more successful at generating engagement than legacy news outlets over the past year.
The success of those outlets on Facebook may also undermine conservatives' oft-repeated claims that social media networks have an anti-conservative bias.
Okay, well, I mean, I can show you exactly when and where the spigots get turned off on our traffic because we watch it every single day.
So, yeah, no.
Tracking the amounts of engagement a post or outlet gets on Facebook is not the same thing as tracking the number of people the content actually reaches through the platform.
In October, Facebook released data showing that the sort of conservative clickbait that performs well in engagement metrics was not actually being seen by as many people as articles from the more mainstream news outlets.
Okay, so in other words, they're now complaining that people click on our headlines but don't read through to the stories.
So they're basically now admitting that they still get more traffic than we do.
But we're still bad, because we exist.
The Daily Wire is clearly successful.
Well, thanks.
We appreciate it.
The company is growing and profitable.
According to CEO Jeremy Boring, who told Axios earlier this year, the company plans to expand more into entertainment and further build out the Daily Wire's smartphone app.
While other publications have seen their engagement numbers for Facebook fall off this year, The Daily Wire has stayed fairly constant, according to NPR's analysis.
I'm depressed by it, but I'm not that surprised, said Settle.
This has everything to do with the psychology of news consumers and the broader issues with polarization in American culture.
See, again, the problem is polarization is caused by us existing.
This entire article is just we exist.
Daily Wire exists and people read it.
Polarization!
Maybe it's polarizing that you want to shut us down.
Maybe that's the polarizing aspect of American politics these days.
Again, for the 1,000th time, I have not called for NPR's informational distribution to be shut down.
I've done so with regard to no other media outlet.
I'm noticing a lot of people from these media outlets want me shut down.
Weird how that works.
The articles The Dailyware publishes don't normally include falsehoods.
And the site says it's committed to truthful, accurate, and ethical reporting.
But, as Settle explains, by only covering specific stories that bolster the conservative agenda, like negative stories about socialist countries and polarizing stories about race and sexuality issues, and only including certain facts, Readers still come away from the Dailyware's content with the impression Republican politicians can do little wrong and cancel culture is among the nation's greatest threat.
So in other words, again, this is NPR saying, you're conservative, so you're bad.
They admit that we are not saying anything false.
They're just angry that we're conservative.
By the way, the New York Times only covers specific stories that bolster their narrative.
They only tell you specific facts that bolster their narrative in the same way we do.
The difference is we're honest and they're liars.
They'll tell you their objective and we're conservative.
Get over it.
An NPR review of stories on the Daily Wire about the COVID-19 pandemic over the past two months found numerous stories about potential side effects from COVID, but none that portrayed the scientifically demonstrated efficacy of the vaccines or which focused explicitly on the hesitancy that has slowed the U.S.
rollout.
Um, wait, hold up a second.
You're saying that we are anti-vax?
Are you insane?
Are you crazy?
Listen to a single moment of this show.
Okay, the site routinely talks about the efficacy of the vaccines.
We do this all the time.
Often, the site's headlines seem like a conglomeration of conservative buzzwords.
This is reporting from NPR, your taxpayer-funded entity.
CNN medical experts urges we must make life hard for unvaccinated.
Test them twice weekly.
There's nothing false about that headline.
They tend not to provide much context for the information they're providing, said Settle.
If you've stripped away enough context, any piece of truth can become a piece of misinformation.
There it is, right there.
Right?
Everything is misinformation because we don't like how you are telling it.
It's true, but we don't like it.
It's misinformation.
This piece is a masterclass in the kind of suppression the left wishes to use in social media to shut down your ability to access information.
This authoritarian bull.
Pushed by your taxpayer dollars, apparently.
It's just incredible.
So, we're bad.
We should be shut out.
I say in the years since he left Breitbart News, Shapiro has carved out a rare niche within the conservative media world.
The graduate of Harvard Law School taps into many of the same culture war themes that former President Donald Trump played into while also disagreeing with Trump.
A feat he's managed without becoming a target of the former president's ire, Shapiro has publicly denounced the alt-right and other people in Trump's orbit like Steve Bannon, as well as the conspiracy theory Trump is the rightful winner of the 2020 election.
But in the same column, I wrote after the violence on January 6th, quote, last week, the Capitol was breached by a group of fringe Trump supporters who had bought into a series of lies.
But in the same column, he quickly turned his attention back to Democrats and their support of the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests last year, which many conservatives have falsely sought to paint broadly as riots.
He's been widely condemned for anti-LGBT comments.
Oh my God, wow.
So again, I'm conservative.
This means I'm bad.
He's just, I'm terrible.
And then they quote a bunch of people who don't like me.
Incredible.
Really, well done here.
So basically, the idea here is we should not exist because we're good at our jobs.
That's the entire article.
The entire article is from NPR, Daily Wire should not exist, and we're misinformation because they disagree.
They're coming for your information.
They're coming for the outlets you like.
They're coming to suppress them.
This is one more reason why you should support every outlet that you like.
Come subscribe at Daily Wire because they're going to come after us.
They're going to try and de-platform us.
It's something they are overtly making clear they want to do right now.
So come subscribe over at Daily Wire right now.
Also pick up a copy of my book all about all of this.
And do it for other people too.
If you like The Blaze, go subscribe at The Blaze.
If you like Fox Nation, go subscribe at Fox Nation.
Seriously, you need to subscribe to the services you like because the left is going to try to take them away.
They're going to try to take neutral service providers like Facebook and destroy them if they don't become overt tools of the left.
That's the goal.
It's despicable.
It's authoritarian.
It's polarizing.
It's going to destroy the country.
They are responsible for the polarization.
They are responsible for tearing all of this apart.
They are responsible for shutting down any sort of rational, realistic, or decent debate on these issues.
And then they proclaim that they're in favor of American unity and truth.
Yeah, bulls**t. Alrighty, we'll be back here later today with much, much more.
In the meantime, go check out the Michael Nolan Show.
Today, he discusses the story of a porn star showing up to a conservative student summit.
You can hear more details about that story over on Michael's show that's available right now.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
Shapiro, this is the Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Elliott Feld.
Executive Producer Jeremy Boring.
Our Supervising Producer is Mathis Blubber.
Production Manager Pavel Lydowsky.
Associate Producer Bradford Carrington.
Post-Producer Justin Barber.
The show is edited by Adam Sievitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and Makeup is by Fabiola Cristina.
Production Assistant Jessica Kranz.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
The Biden White House is calling on big tech to censor conservatives for spreading misinformation online.
A porn star shows up to a conservative student summit that I happen to be at right now.
And in Los Angeles, the officials are calling on a new mask mandate, even for people who have already been vaccinated with the vaccine that's so effective that you still need that filthy cloth over your face.