I'm more curious on what was actully paid and did it really sway their content at all? That part of it seems super unclear so far. Honestly I think conspiracy theorists at least the more level headed ones that are open to all sources (Hard to find) are very smart. A good portion of the questions they ask and deep dive into things brings up some very powerful things that are going on within governments and companies.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
They got talking points and a number of videos they needed to make.
Well no. Thats not true at all. What you described is "investigative journalism". Gathering factual information about an entity, individuals, doing deep dives into documentation, etc.
That has nothing do with conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theorists are people that conclude something is fact because a motive, thats often times made up by them, might exist. And they often keep the accusations broad because ofc, they cant accuse anyone specifically of anything due to them not knowing jack shit.
Its more of a problem of them not knowing how to think.