I'm seeing so many well-intentioned media fact checks that are basically just amplifying claims that are only circulating on Twitter. There are a lot of journalists who are still regulars there who don't realize the extent to which it's warping their view of what's happening in the world.

Perhaps what happens on X should simply stay on X.

Oh, they do realize. It is why they are doing it. I reject your proposition that the media fact checks are generally well-intentioned. They are selective, ignore proportionality, and by omission favor the right-wingers.

We need to get the journalists off and to do that we need to understand their reasons for being there (front row seat to regular people reacting to pols/celebs immediately?) and figure out where in the chain we have the most influence

More precisely: it warps your view of *what people think* about what's happening in the world. Everything there kind of amplifies far-right framing, and if you're not careful it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking that's the default mindset in the U.S. It's not.

What’s worse: there are many journalists who are well aware of what Twitter is and what it’s doing to their worldview, and they don’t care, likely because they agree.

It's very interesting to see the same professional group that tut-tuts about maintaining a critical eye and perusing a diverse array of information sources, being unable to maintain more than one (1) social media account.

Maybe they know, and they like it.

Counter-point: They know and don't care.