When this all started, the Onion released a priceless 'press statement':
"Through it all, InfoWars has shown an unswerving commitment to manufacturing anger and radicalizing the most vulnerable members of society—values that resonate deeply with all of us at Global Tetrahedron.
No price would be too high for such a cornucopia of malleable assets and minds. And yet, in a stroke of good fortune, a formidable special interest group has outwitted the hapless owner of InfoWars (a forgettable man with an already-forgotten name) and forced him to sell it at a steep bargain: less than one trillion dollars..."
Or just inspect element + press delete. In some cases you also need to then delete an extra gray overlay and re-enable scroll on the base html tag, but takes 30s
The idea was never to apply a reasonable punishment, it's just an excuse to destroy and silence a voice that, for better or worse, is uncontrollable by the establishment. Out of every 10 things you read on a place like Infowars, 5 will be crazy cucko insane shit, 4 will be common sense american conservative talking points, but one will be some hard truth that no side of the power scale wants to be said out loud. Infowars delenda est.
I’m just not sure you can make the claim that this is an issue between the outlet and the establishment. It’s had hosts like Roger Stone doing 5 episodes a week. He’s the former campaign advisor for the sitting president of the United States, and advisor to Dole, Bush (both), and Reagan.
It doesn’t get more establishment than that. So the “down and out anti-establishment underdog” narrative doesn’t apply in my opinion.
If people want to get their "hard truths" out, they shouldn't contaminate them with 9/10 parts of lies, and they certainly shouldn't run a harassment campaign against the parents of murdered children.
Yes, and he should be punished for the Sandyhook fiasco. But 1.4 billion dollars? Is that reasonable punishment? Why not 1 trillion dollars? It's as clear as day that the intent is to silence his voice, and not because of Sandyhoook.
If "hurting innocent people with [their] voice without regret" is to become cause for such "settlements" there are many, many individuals about to be "settled down". Jerks like Hasan Piker, cooks like Candace Owens can all start their application for affordable housing soon.
Can the down-voters for once let go of their pacifiers and explain where they don't agree? Is it because I call Piker a jerk or Owens a cook? They're an interesting combo, a living proof of the horse shoe theory of political extremism. I'm used to finding apologists for the "left" on this site so it is probably the former but maybe there are closeted Owens supporters here as well?
Speak up, ye absolutely not down-trodden knee-jerk-down-voters, let us all partake of your wisdom.
Not sure if it even matters since Alex Jones is just going to keep doing what he's doing.
Judgements demanding he pay billions keep coming out and he just says he's not paying, and nobody has forced him to either. Even if infowars' brand changes hands, that's the extent of it.
A million dollars a year for... what? A gag that fans of infowars won't watch, and there aren't enough anti-fans to appreciate? It feels personal at this point.
Tim heidecker summarised their thinking wonderfully.
"I just thought it would be just a beautiful joke if we could take this pretty toxic, negative, destructive force of Infowars and rebrand it as this beautiful place for our creativity”.
Not to mention Alex Jones is still up and running elsewhere spreading his nonsense and hawking his merch. So it's a cute gag, I guess, and gets the Sandy Hook families some money, but doesn't really change the status quo.
As opposed to the Alex Jones show, a Two Minute Hate for rightwingers? These people love to dish it out but can't take it when someone else uses their tactics against them.
So, amongst all the things that happened and happening right now, you think "someone is incredibly petty against Alex Jones" is worth spending your time complaining about. Alex Jones, the one who harassed mass shooting survivors.
Pause for a moment. Do you have young kids? Imagine for a moment that they were slaughtered in a mass shooting and a bunch of people made money by launching a harassment campaign targeting you as a liar who probably never had kids, or alternatively used them as paid actors. Imagine this campaign went on for years.
And someone repurpose one of the instigator’s web sites as a humour outlet is the issue that leaves a bad taste in your mouth?
"Through it all, InfoWars has shown an unswerving commitment to manufacturing anger and radicalizing the most vulnerable members of society—values that resonate deeply with all of us at Global Tetrahedron.
No price would be too high for such a cornucopia of malleable assets and minds. And yet, in a stroke of good fortune, a formidable special interest group has outwitted the hapless owner of InfoWars (a forgettable man with an already-forgotten name) and forced him to sell it at a steep bargain: less than one trillion dollars..."
Full statement here https://theonion.com/heres-why-i-decided-to-buy-infowars/
What exactly does that do? Which web browser?
I’m on mobile right now, so can’t test.
Alternatively, you can disable JavaScript on the website. That lets me view it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punitive_damages
It doesn’t get more establishment than that. So the “down and out anti-establishment underdog” narrative doesn’t apply in my opinion.
> Infowars delenda est.
Yes.
Speak up, ye absolutely not down-trodden knee-jerk-down-voters, let us all partake of your wisdom.
If you ask me, it's getting harder and harder to draw a line between those two categories...
Judgements demanding he pay billions keep coming out and he just says he's not paying, and nobody has forced him to either. Even if infowars' brand changes hands, that's the extent of it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/20/the-onion-al...
See previous discussion linked in sibling as well.
Of course it's personal. Alex Jones is an arsehole manufacturing outrage for profit. Being made fun of is the least of his problems
"I just thought it would be just a beautiful joke if we could take this pretty toxic, negative, destructive force of Infowars and rebrand it as this beautiful place for our creativity”.
This keeps it out of that ecosystem, which I think is a really good thing.
It is openly and proudly personal. It is also political, also openly.
I’d rather it be collective action that produces real change, but humor is cathartic so I’ll take it.
And someone repurpose one of the instigator’s web sites as a humour outlet is the issue that leaves a bad taste in your mouth?
Fucking hell that's a funny line.