You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Pixel_loves_Polygon ago

I don't trust Dr.Phil, or should I say, I don't trust the people and the company he works for. The truth is that not one second of that interview would have aired if it wasn't pre-approved by a horde of lawyers, producers and network executives. That should make you think. He's not some defiant lone wolf hero. The media will do two things about pizzagate. Deny, and when that doesn't work, steer the narrative in a direction away from something they don't want you to see or into a dead end. You may get small local stories that crop up and cover it faithfully, but the big networks are not going to take any chances on it if they are being told to squash it. Which I think it's rather clear they are attempting to do. I remain highly skeptical of corporate media even when they seemingly do us a favor.

hels ago

I honestly do not know why this episode was ever approved if they want to hide the issue. If we think about the election all hillary did was talk about Donald Trump being a misogynist, racist, prejudiced hateful white man. It is known that you should only focus on your strengths and refer to the opponent as little as possible. Let your opponent talk about you first and counter as they have showed their hand.

Back to PizzaGate, I am curious as to what direction you think the Dr. Phil episode is going to direct the narrative. I don't know what channel he airs on in the US but what if some of the execs of that company (and possibly Phil himself) are guilty? A guilty conscious often thinks talking about the issue proves their innocence. "We here at network XYZ want to talk about this issue as we have nothing to do with it and think it should be talked about."

I don't know, just trying to talk about different reasons.