02:03:30 PM Feb 16th 2012
Is this a trope page or a bitch fest? Seriously, I quote from the home page:
- "We are also not a wiki for bashing things. Once again, we're about celebrating fiction, not showing off how snide and sarcastic we can be."
06:29:00 PM Jan 8th 2013
I was wondering the same myself. I even just registered thinking "What the Hell, Hero?" I don't care if he thinks the moon is really a base for Monkey llamas from Jupiter spying on us, cautious editing judgement should still apply.
05:26:03 PM Jan 23rd 2013
This is by far the most bias page currently on Tvtrophes.org. I am going to have to call for cleanup.
03:41:25 PM Apr 2nd 2013
Beware the Golden Mean Fallacy. Sure, some parts of this page can be a bit snide, but you also don't want to overdose on political correctness to the point where you're misrepresenting the reality of things. Is he a conspiracy theorist? Yes. Do some of his conspiracy theories lack even basic research or even internal consistency? Absolutely. Does that mean he deserves to get jabbed about freaking out during a rant and having a heart attack? Maybe, but probably not here.
05:13:40 AM Apr 27th 2013
edited by 126.96.36.199
edited by 188.8.131.52
It is true that some of his conspiracy theories lack internal consistency, but it is also true the Alex Jones actually sites his sources and provides his methodology that allows him to come to these conclusions, which is heads and solders above the rest of the media. I have been watching this show since November 2012 because Ghost never came back on the air and Alex trolled Piers Morgan so well with his partition to deport him on http://www.whitehouse.gov/. If I had the time to go back in the archives a couple of years and start putting things about the guests and subjects on this page I could easily get something that looks like the Bleach page.
01:58:59 PM Apr 27th 2013
Oflameo, just because he cites sources does not mean other media doesn't, because they do. And just because he cites his sources, doesn't mean the conclusions he draws are right. And just because he cites his sources, doesn't mean the sources themselves are accurate or applicable. And just because he cites his sources, does not mean that he represents them accurately. I can personally attest to that last one, i have seen him indesputably lie about named sources, twisting them(in this case, cropping photos) to suit his own theories. Conspiracy theories are not, by definition, false. Some conspiracies do exist- Nixon conspired to surveil the Democratic National Convention. A group of extremist Moslems conspired to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings. BP conspired to hide the true extent of their oil spill from the US government. Real conspiracies are secretive, deal with the absolute bare minimum of conspirators, and are extremely difficult to pull off, even at the absolute highest levels of corporate and government power. Jones, however, peddles false conspiracy theories. His conspiracy theories are like fanfiction or WM Gs for real life. Motivated by blind hatred and distrust for institutions, experts and mainstream journalism, Jones and his ilk refuse to entertain the possibility that the "official story" is the truth, or that random things sometimes just happen without rhyme or reason. They draw logical-seeming connections between disparate events, positing a gigantic hyper-competent cabal behind everything. Then, everything is simple. There's always someone in control of everything- even the weather, if you buy the B.S. HAARP conspiracy. It's a very seductive and self-enforcing worldview, one which cannot be penetrated by evidence to the contrary, because refutations are just assimilated into the conspiracy as just another instance of "them" trying to cover it up! Eventually, these conspiracies become based on nothing more than the speculation and preconcieved notions of the conspiracy theorist. All contrary evidence is dismissed out of hand, often without even cursory examination. That is one way you can tell a conspiracy theory from a genuine conspiracy. So your idea, Oflameo, that Alex Jones' own rationalizations, biases and methodologies have any bearing on the accuracy of the conclusion is laughable. Of course the conspiracy theories make sense to him, that's the point! Conspiracy theories are alternate explanations for events that are specifically designed to sound plausible, even if they're the furthest thing from it.
05:18:11 AM Dec 19th 2015
edited by Criblecoblis
edited by Criblecoblis
Having been a member of the Sacred Cow Productions "brotherhood" (w/Alex, Joe Rogan, Doug Stanhope et al) from shortly after Bill Hicks' death in 1994 to 2003, I can assure you that (1) Alex is *not* Bill Hicks by any stretch of the imagination, and (2) he wholeheartedly believes *everything* he says and is the same person (albeit not *quite* as bombastic) when dining in a nice restaurant as when he's working the microphone. Something about him has changed since we last spoke (which I can only guess *may* have to do with the Christian ownership of the radio concern that currently airs and distributes his broadcasts) but I can't quite put my finger on the specifics of the difference. In any case, I shall endeavor at some time in the future to shore up the walls of your Alex Jones coverage.