Media gatekeepers are losing control over the conversation, and robust censorship is their only chance to regain power

For inspiration, they look far eastward to the censorship machine in China.

Elon Musk and President Trump had a two-hour informal conversation on X’s Spaces audio broadcasting feature last night. The two spoke about a variety of issues, broadcasting their unfiltered thoughts to millions of listeners.

I thought both Musk and Trump came off as reasonable, rational, and likable. There was nothing particularly extreme about their respective worldviews, and both offered rational ideas for how to tackle issues like the growth of government, inflation, and illegal immigration.

---

Please check out our amazing, curated sponsors, which are specifically tailored for our readership. It goes a long way to supporting The Dossier.

Grow your wealth with Wine & Whiskey.

Vinovest is the largest US wine and whiskey investing platform with over $100 million in assets under management.

Diversify beyond the stock market and watch your money get better with age. Discover how these tangible, appreciating assets can enhance your investment portfolio.

---

Even if they engaged in some wild, controversial conversation, it would be their right to do so. But no normal person who sat through the back and forth would possibly be able to understand how the Spaces event posed some kind of threat to global order, liberal democracy, and the like.

X Spaces

Yet here’s how the corporate media covered the Musk-Trump conversation:

Yes, it’s utterly psychotic in every imaginable way. They’re spinning out in bouts of fury because two powerful men dared to sidestep the gatekeepers and have a fireside chat with millions of listeners worldwide.

Prior to the event, the lunatics in the corporate press and governmental bodies around the world took measures to attempt to pressure Musk into canceling the Spaces interview.

Thierry Breton, a high-ranking European Union commissioner, threatened Mr Musk with sanctions, given the supposed “risk of amplification of potentially harmful content” by platforming Trump. He posted a letter from his agency warning Musk that the EU now has laws against the spread of “disinformation.”

Later that day, a reporter at The Washington Post suggested at the White House press briefing that the Biden-Harris Administration pre-censor Musk for “misinformation.”

You would think that such anti-speech sentiment would be roundly condemned by the White House Press Corps. But that’s only because you’d be misinformed about what motivates the gatekeepers.

Yes, they all agree with their WaPo colleague, which is why you didn’t hear anyone challenge the truly outrageous, anti-American suggestion that the government should censor an open, lawful conversation over the internet.

The corporate media largely consists of credentialed midwits who know they can’t make it on their own through building an engaged audience on platforms like Substack (I so much appreciate your support!), so they parasitically latch on to dying institutions with the hopes to extend their employers’ increasingly weakening grip over the conversation.

Unfortunately, it’s still not impossible for the corporate media gatekeepers to reverse that trajectory, but American traditions certainly make it quite difficult here. In Europe, they’re having much more success squashing speech.

For inspiration, the gatekeepers look eastward to the enterprise established by the Communist Party of China (CCP). In China, information is captured, filtered, and then disseminated through their Great Firewall, so that the government and its loyal stooges can completely control the narrative.

Our gatekeepers in the West have increasingly embraced an increasingly tyrannical public-private censorship apparatus because it’s the only way they can stay on top of their unearned pedestal.

For now, the gatekeepers are on their heels. Let’s hope that momentum continues, and that brave leaders continue to push back against attempts to silence the masses.