Yes I agree. Not discounting it by any means but it seems like the news cycle is dominated by the new COVID variant, yet I've seen literally nothing on this trial. Makes you wonder what's really going on and how deep the rot runs in this country.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/11/30/nyregion/ghislaine-m...
It's also the main headline on the frontpage of the BBC atm:
Some people are mistaking not reading with it not being covered.
But you're right: The topic of discussion all over Twitter and Reddit is about the lack of mainstream news coverage, which is such a weird claim to make when it can be disproven with 60 seconds of loading any news website.
- NYT has one 100px tall box, 4 pages below the fold
- WaPo has coronavirus, acai bowls, Biden, Sydney Powell above fold, Ghislaine 2 pages down
- CNN I don't see Maxwell or Ghislaine anywhere but one Epstein box bottom 1st page
- Fox has two boxes, both below fold
Is this known or a guess?
Reading Manufacturing Consent (as well as @nyt_diff) has led me to believe that we should not jump to come up with charitable excuses for why media does not cover stories in the way we think they should.
If Joe Manchin and Susan Collins teamed up to make a bipartisan death ray pointed at us from outer space, it would get less media coverage than the Rittenhouse trial, because bipartisan stuff is not engaging news.
That was your mistake right there. Bill Gates has been a criminal for longer than I can clearly remember, the only thing that kept his company from being split up was his political connections. Bill Gates did not deserve anybody's respect past the point where he started to use his wealth to buy access and cover for his misdeeds. And make no mistake: the rot that this caused has never really left Microsoft, it has only caused it to get smarter about how it presents itself.
But there certainly isn't some suspicious media blackout on it. You can readily find coverage.
The media didn't tell people to get interested in it.
That said, it is hardly a conspiracy theory to point out that the media has a disincentive to give this story the attention it deserves because of the amount of prominent figures implicated. Amy Robach of ABC even claimed that they squashed the story initially because they were worried that covering it would impact their ability to air the Harry/Markle wedding.
Edit: Not sure why I am being downvoted for pointing this out, but if anyone thinks this is baseless or conspiratorial: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Robach#Jeffrey_Epstein_sto...
Even now, that leak is mostly reported by unreliable sources like The Sun above and Project Veritas rather than more established news organizations despite the video's apparent legitimacy.
The accusations against Epstein (and association with Trump/Clinton/Dersh/Prince Andrew/etc) have been reported for like 15 years now but for whatever reason it took the Miami Herald's reporting in 2019 to break through..
I don't expect conspiracy, though; it's far more likely that the Omicron variant is far more relevant to markets. The FT also did publish two stories on Ghislaine Maxwell about 23-24 hours ago, but it's fair to say that the paper isn't emphasizing the story (by comparison, the Theranos Elizabeth Holmes trial had a story on the front page this morning).
https://www.ft.com/content/f58cc9df-98d3-4f11-9d24-e2c4e059b...
1. Moderna chief predicts existing vaccines will struggle with Omicron
2. The inside story of the Pfizer vaccine: ‘a once-in-an-epoch windfall’
3. Powell signals support for quicker ‘taper’ of Fed’s bond-buying scheme
4. Holmes accuses former business partner of abuse in Theranos trial
5. Inditex shares fall after it appoints founder’s daughter as chair
Even if the observation were true, it doesn't contradict my note that the FT omitted it from the front page stories this morning (US edition, FT, iPad app).
However, in the interest of reporting updated information over being 'right,' a new story about Ghislaine Maxwell (published "an hour ago" at the time of this comment) has since been published after my original comment, and now appears on the front page (website and iPad app).
That said, from my observations, it's clear that the Theranos story today was more popular than the Ghislaine Maxwell story, with my inference that it was more widely-promoted. I'm not arguing that there was an effort to suppress reporting, but I am arguing that it's reasonable to conclude that one story may have been marketed more heavily than the other, from seemingly-minor decisions in web design and the stories selected for the mobile apps.
probably because its directly related to finance?