The fact that both broadcast and Internet outlets for the establishment news means that it's them which is the issue, not the medium it is being sent by.
I expect more moves by Government to suppress or censor everyone but the "authoritative news sources".
This will then give the Government power to introduce new legislation under statutory instruments where only a minister with a swipe of a pen can bring in new powers without scrutiny or debate in order to quash dissent.
It's already happened before during Covid-19.
WeAreFairCop response: https://twitter.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1831995103973376493
Lotus Eaters response (she was a viewer of the channel): https://rumble.com/v5e9gpp-this-video-could-get-you-arrested.html
It's not necessarily that they consider themselves unattractive, it's that everyone else considers them unattractive. The halo effect and ugly tax are real things and your looks (predominantly genetic so you can't change them at the gym) do influence how people treat you and whether you are welcomed into social groups. If you're unattractive, you need to be exceptionally talented in a social activity to overcome thar. Neuroatypicality also have an effect. We know that a disproportionate number of incels have things such as autism.
If you have ever read or studied female feminist media and literature, it has a trope based on reality where they don't want to get rid of all men but rather they want a society with just two groups of individuals - women and "Chad". The male "ally" is too blind to see this and assumes his sycophancy will save him under this ideology. It's also why as Government cabinets become majority women and male feminist (such as the UK one is now), you're starting to see the beginning of the introduction of new misogyny reviews and laws which will criminalise incels, unwanted attention, communication and behaviour (such as a woman having to swipe left or reject a man's advances) as well as unrequited love that only Chads would not fall foul of at any point.
Bonus video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiJ_fPbBGoI
TL;DW - Men bad.
Comments turned off of course but the downvotes are still enabled.
They know that alternative media is a threat to their model because they want all the talking points to themselves as a monopoly. This is why they have to attack hard and twist things. Worse still, Governments will deem the likes of CBC as the arbiters of truth or in the case of the UK's Online Safety Act, give the BBC an exception to the rules on misinformation!
It's also why the UK media has been all in against the Lotus Eaters. It's a threat to the monopoly that the BBC, ITN and Sky has in news and politics.
Their issue is with the loaning of media. They don't make a royalty from every loan and they want every individual to purchase that media outright. They actively put a warning on every media that loaning is prohibited. That includes physical libraries too and they're now under threat too.
Their ultimate goal is to gatekeep and paywall the exchange of ideas and information. If you want to see how that works today, look at how much control is placed upon and excessively expensive peer reviewed journals are.
There's no way of distributing a digital copy legally unless direct from the publisher or with their express consent. And the only people they're going to give that to are companies that riddle it with DRM.
Ultimately this ruling could also affect physical media and physical libraries. One of the arguments is that libraries allow individuals to consume content without royalties being paid as would be if that individual purchased a copy. Where we are going to get into difficulty is where a work is out of print and there is no legal way to purchase it first hand (they want second hand sales of media criminalised too for the same reason as the lending of media, no royalty payment).
I remember video game companies went in heavy regarding loaning of games to the point they boycotted stores such as Blockbuster Video or if they couldn't do it, they did like The Lion King did on 16-bit systems, made the second level so hard it dissuaded people from loaning and nudged them to purchase the game.
Every media has a warning that loaning is prohibited. They want everyone to purchase an individual copy for themselves.
If you want an idea of where things will go, see the control and prices for peer reviewed papers. The publishers want to gatekeep and paywall the exchange of ideas and information.
And it looks like most of the people tangentially related like Tim, Dave Rubin, and Benny Johnson (the three I checked) are still fine and still have their channels.
We live in a time of guilt by association. I wouldn't say they're safe yet.
It's likely they'll go down the same road the UK is expected to go shortly and just outright ban VPN's. Payment processors won't touch the paid VPN providers who won't operate in Brazil if they aren't getting paid. As for crypto payments for VPN service, at some point you'll need to turn fiat currency into crypto and they'll likely target that too.
I've noticed that the Lotus Eaters have been more cautious and more supportive of religious authoritarianism as of late. Maybe they're dropping the libertarian aspects of themselves to blend in and not be taken offline. As Esther McVey MP is potentially going to find out for criticising the Government yesterday. Someone has already reported her for being "grossly offensive" which is the same thing Count Dankula got arrested and charged with.
Reminds me of what's happening in Hong Kong as a result of the new sedition law. I suspect sedition will be reintroduced into the UK. In my opinion (caveat, not a legal expert), if the law remained today, those arrested would have been charged with sedition too.
If there is one thing the UK Government will not tolerate and will make an example of, it is dissent.
Once the extreme misogyny review and inevitable legislation comes into play, you're going to find England flag wavers, elderly grannies complaining on Facebook and unattractive, socially awkward single men all sharing prison cells that were once filled with the most (what we would consider) egregious criminals.
That's starting to change as young women start to outearn their male peers. When the state, family and society provide income (via wealth transfer from men to women), parenting and all the benefits of what a "beta bux" used to provide without the disadvantage of having to live with said man, they will in increasing numbers refuse to let the beta bux into their life and remain alone.
I feared that games would turn to the as a service model because everything else is following suit. Where you don't own the game you purchase and they finally deal with the "Linux problem" as anti-cheat is notorious for not being able to run. I've heard a few developers bad mouth Linux users usually along the lines of entitled and skinflints.
There's also the assumption that if people pay for something and handsomely, they will treat the service with more respect, self-censor and be far more cautious, particularly if they impose a minimum term agreement where if you are banned, you are still paying for the service.
It isn't new. Even before social media, even before the Internet, people wanted to compare and compete with one another by lying about their social status. It's the reason for the sitcom Keeping Up Appearances in the 90s and the phrase "keeping up with the Jones's". It's just now on a macro scale, you're competing worldwide and everyone thinks they are a celebrity.
One of the things I warned would happen in the long run would be countries implementing national Intranets that were walled gardened from the Internet. Like North Korea's Kwangmyong but not as strict (citizens can still contact other people worldwide but under heavy surveillance whereas North Korea forbids all communication with the outside world).
Brazil seems to be heading down that road with the UK following closely behind and the EU in tow. "For your safety".
One of the theories that I have heard as to why the worst criminals are being freed to make room for "rioters" is that a message is being sent to any potential dissent once unpopular and damaging decisions are made in the next couple of months, starting with the abolition of the winter fuel allowance for most pensioners but also other decisions that will target the elderly, single people, the disabled and victims of domestic abuse and violence. Namely the most vulnerable people in society. As a result, civil unrest akin to the Poll Tax riots are expected so this move is being done in advance to dissuade dissenters furious at what is being done to said vulnerable groups who can't fight back for themselves.