adminhotep

Your site looks very personal and uses terms like "me" (I don’t sell your information. Your stuff is safe with me!) indicating you do this all yourself, but do you?

With such a successful business, and only having so many hours in the day that you yourself can actually fill appointments, do you have any employees who provide some portion of the same service, like a ghost writer? A ghost Chloe?

I thought it was a symbiotic kleptocracy, where those in power are incentivized by corporate interest bribes and campaign contributions to steal on their behalf from anyone not in the above two groups.

What was the threat assessment for journalists at the beginning of this thing? Were you warned that police would be arresting you, attacking you with batons, shooting at you with rubber bullets, sending tear gas at you?

I understand that as journalists you may want to be there regardless of the personal threat, but was Reuters or other parent companies aware that police would be so incredibly hostile to media presence from the outset, or was that a surprise to them?

In your video, you say "Scaling this solution to a billion people would solve climate change."

How are you reaching that conclusion? If heating accounts for around 42% of large cities greenhouse gas emissions, and a large portion of the 24% of global emissions sourced to "electricity and heat production" and you are only targeting about 1/8th of the global population, how does that math work out?

Questioning the integrity of elections is incredibly in this season. Whether it was the Iowa Caucus with what seemed like coordinated last minute polling location switches, and myriad issues with the Shadow Inc. developed reporting app, charges by the OAS against Bolivia on overnight totals, which led to a military coup (later debunked by researchers published in the NYT) or fraud claims in the 2020 general election along the same line against states' vote count.

Media has displayed different reactions in each of these cases - all but ignoring in the first case, uncritically supporting in the second case, and attempting to head off the expected fraud arguments (red mirage coverage and explanation) in the third.

My question is, give how differently the organizations charged with informing the public react to these circumstances, how am I to actually be informed on the true integrity of an election? Are there trustworthy independent unbiased resources devoted to analysis of election integrity that you can recommend, because the aforementioned groups don't seem to cut it consistently.