 Can you tell us how you actually defined Doxin and the difference between Doxin and real reporting? Yeah, of course. Hello and welcome back to all my YouTube rumble and bit shoot people. Didn't know I was on all those other platforms. Well, look at the description and pinned comment to find all those links. So over the last couple weeks we've all been traded to some of that A-grade highly potent top shelf gaslighting. From the likes of the Washington Post and one of their mentally ill goblins pretending to be a journalist who decided that as a journalist she was gonna target a private citizen for the high crime of reposting the words of extremist left-wingers. That brings us to today where Lorenz is apparently still somehow doing interviews on this topic. Despite being nuked and discredited for her increasingly psychotic looking communist crusade, then again she's doing this interview with a guy whose show was cancelled a month after it was launched. And I promise we're getting right into this clip. But first a quick 30 seconds to tell you about this special offer from preparewithdronetech.com. Friends, big dangers are all around us these days. To survive what's coming you need to be prepared and self-reliant. That's why I recommend getting yourself some cryptocurrency, some land, some gold, but especially a proper stockpile of emergency food. It's easier than you think. Go to preparewithdronetech.com right now. And you'll save $50 and get free shipping on a generous four-week supply of emergency food from my Patreon supply. Go to preparewithdronetech.com right now. That's preparewithdronetech.com So here's the next one. The conservative supporters of this account said you were doxing the person. You're doxing them. So can you tell us how you actually defined doxing and the difference between doxing and real reporting? Yeah, of course. Well, the word doxing has been so devalued and it just kind of is a buzzword now in the right way media. Doxing means revealing highly, highly personal, non-public information with the goal of harassment or sort of destroying someone's life. We absolutely did not reveal any personal information about this woman at all. Of course! She really just oozes crazy, doesn't she? As usual, we're dealing with another one of these bubble-dwelling NPCs who lacks any sense of self-awareness. So right off the bat with this, they're lying. With Lorenz just dismissing that she was doxing because, quote, doxing is just a buzzword used by right-wing media. Of course, this is absurd. Doxing is a real thing and Lorenz did it. She claims that neither her nor the Washington Post released any of this person's information at all. One, we didn't even know that she was a woman. I mean, why did we need to know that? Two, not only did Lorenz show up to her family member's house and harassed them, but she was harassing other people, random people who just happened to share the last name. She even harassed and threatened people who interacted with Libs of Tiktok on Twitter. And finally, she did in fact release her personal information, including that she's a real estate person in Brooklyn, along with all of her contact details. They remove that from the story later, but the internet never forgets. Lastly, she claims that she wasn't doxing and rationalizes that by saying doxing is done to, quote, target and ruin someone's life. Oh really? Then why were you contacting all these people and then accusing them of being part of a, quote, hate campaign? Just keep all these lies that they're telling in mind as we continue this shit show. It'll come back to bite them remotely. And you know, I know that sometimes reporting practices can seem foreign to people that aren't familiar with journalism, but this was very by the book and very benign. And the thing is the right wing media will lie, right? They kind of just will spin up these narratives. The goal is to sow doubt and to discredit journalism. Did you catch that? Right wing media are people who try to sow doubt and discredit journalism. My first question is, does this nut job literally think that her job is above scrutiny? Of course, anybody that criticizes or questions her journalism must be a right wing fanatic. Right wing being anything they just don't want to have to deal with. And that is, you know, that is, that is their agenda. And I think we need to be prepared for that and recognize those things for what it is. I mean, you know, Brian, so much of what I do is try and educate people about the mechanics of these online outrage cycles and harassment and sort of educate news organizations on how to cover it and how to understand bad faith attacks. And so I think it's really important as, you know, us members of the media who cover media to recognize bad faith attacks when they're when they're levy. There's just so much projection and inability to self reflect everything she just said could be applied to her and this whole charade. Can she not see that? She literally targeted lives of TikTok because her and her readers were outraged that she's reposting things that were already publicly posted. And I just love that she feels it's her job to educate the media on how to cover these stories. It's all just so herwellian, anti-democratic and communist. Everything that she says here runs counter to the principles of journalism and free speech. You know how I know for a fact that I'm right about this, because if we were to take her tactics and use them against her, she would suddenly have a problem with it. And you know what? This isn't even hypothetical because it happened. Every single social tie, I had severe PTSD from this. I contemplated suicide. It got really bad. You feel like any little piece of information that gets out on you will be used by the worst people on the internet to destroy your life. And it's so isolating and terrifying. It's horrifying. I'm so sorry. It's overwhelming. It's really hard. Oh come on, are you kidding me? She's trying to stop herself from laughing. There is no story here without the left-wing outrage. Unless of course she can concoct some great a steaming conspiratorial baseless bullshit to justify it. I think it's rare to see an account gain so much prominence so quickly and be shaping these narratives in such an effective way, especially against trans people. So let me get this right. This assault on a private citizen for exercising free speech in a very passive way actually. Again, she's just reposting videos that these libs had already posted to the public. It's all justified because Taylor Wren says that it's against trans people. What exactly is against trans people on the lives of TikTok account? We don't know because she doesn't provide any examples or a shred of evidence to back up her accusations. The lives of TikTok account repost videos of people acting completely absurdly so that the rest of us can point and laugh. In some cases, she does repost videos of people from education. These people are typically flaunting the fact that they are extremists and that's what leads to them losing their jobs. If there's anybody that lives of TikTok is targeting, it's insane people who have already flaunted to the world that they have no business teaching. Not to mention that the Democrat state media pretends like these people don't exist. So of course journalists like Lorenz here are trying to cover it up by taking out lives of TikTok. You'll notice that her initial rationalization for targeting lives of TikTok was because she was able to get so many followers and was so effective in her messaging. What she doesn't say here is that the messaging is so effective because the message is coming straight from the horse's mouth. I use the term minor attracted person or math in the title and throughout the book for multiple reasons. First of all, because I think it's important to use terminology for groups that members of that group want others to use for them. And math advocacy groups like Before You Act have advocated for use of the term map. They've advocated for it primarily because it's less stigmatizing than other terms like pedophile. A lot of people, when they hear the term pedophile, they automatically assume that it means a sex offender. And that isn't true, and it leads to a lot of misconceptions about attractions toward minors. It's undeniable because it's right there in their own words. And I think it's incredibly important, you know, as someone that covers the influence or industry to know who is exerting influence in this way. I mean, for all we knew, this could have been a foreign actor, right? Or someone we just didn't know. Like, of course! Do you believe this story? This doesn't even make any sense. You revealed her identity because you didn't know who she was, but the Washington Post statement was, quote, her identity had become public knowledge. If her identity was public knowledge, then Lorenz would have known that she wasn't a foreign actor. You're so full of shit! It turns out, like it always does, that the only people who use foreign actors in this situation was the Washington Post and Taylor Lorenz. Imagine that, accusing her political opponents of what she was actually engaged in. We never see that, do we? Didn't Stelter just speak at a conference about disinformation? Well, it was apparently a training conference because this entire segment was disinformation. It really makes you wonder why a company like T-Mobile would sponsor such a corrupt show. Don't spend your money on companies that lie to you. That's all I have for that one. If you enjoyed it, please hit that like button, share, and subscribe. Then leave a comment to let us all know what you think. Thanks a lot.