How reliable is meidas touch?

[drray23]

Is it the left version of propaganda videos, or is it reliable? I find it incredible that the information in this video would be true.

Apparently, we abandoned 13 US bases in the Middle East because they are being pounded by drones ? Our military moved out and is working remotely from hotel rooms. This does not seem credible.

If that is true, we are truly fucked up and did not prepare adequately for drone wars. I mean, this has been going on for at least two years now in Ukraine, so one would think one would learn from it and develop countermeasures instead of Patriot and THAD missiles ill-suited for this.

?si=Ce0-5iOR5LBBKWD4

[mr715]

1. MAJOR hyperbole in every headline

STUNS AUDIENCE!

Usually they make 30 seconds of content into 10 minutes of video.

However, since reality has a liberal bias they are usually correct factually even if they present it in a very annoying fashion.

[QueerDuck]

4. I loved them at first. I was one of the subscribers that helped them to reach their first million. HOWEVER...

... I've since unsubscribed when they decided that insulting my intelligence, and fluffing up the most NOTHING of NOTHING BURGERS into a 15 minute video that could have been covered in 2 minutes. They have become the very corporate-greedy-money-machine media "monster" that they always complained about.

Pity.

[mr715]

5. I want to say they made good ads.

I don't really recall if it was them or some other associated group.

When I need a quick political dopamine kick, I'll sometimes click their videos but I've been getting diminishing returns. Raw Story similarly presents articles sensationally and with so little content as to be the news equivalent of potato chips.

Agree with you, QueerDuck.

[niyad]

28. The Lincoln Project may be what you are thinking with the political ads.

[mr715]

32. It is, you are correct.

[hlthe2b]

23. Yes. The hyperbole and clickbaiting is annoying as hell. That said, they BASE their stories on true

reporting (mostly from others, although they do have a fairly high ranked former military person traveling to Ukraine and areas of the Middle East to do reporting as well. His name escapes me, but I think he may have reported on this military base story as well.

But, yes. The hyperbole, repetition, filler, often off-putting ads, and constant making of a 60 second video into 15 minutes or more has gotten ridiculous. I limit myself to the occasional view every few days and if they don't get to the point fairly quickly, I skim the transcript (Youtube at least gives that) and move on.

Do I think they are propaganda? Not really, but they do milk everything with more hyperbole than any of us should find acceptable. But it is still based on truth. So, that alone is better than RW media and MSM won't report on any of this at all until it blows up to their ever-embarrassment.

[Escurumbele]

46. I googled it, and this is what showed:

Middle East Challenges: As of March 2026, intensified retaliatory strikes in the Gulf have caused massive damage to U.S. bases, forcing troops to abandon some facilities and work remotely from safer, often commercial, locations.

Did not watch the video, not sure if this is what they are referring to.

[EYESORE 9001]

2. If you're waiting for the lickspittle corporate media to corroborate

don’t hold yer breath. Another alternative is foreign media - BBC, for instance.

[Ocelot II]

3. Not especially, at least according to this:

https://adfontesmedia.com/meidastouch-podcast-bias-and-reliability/

They offer political commentaries, not objective news reports. And their video titles are annoyingly tendentious.

[W_HAMILTON]

7. Also according to that, MS NOW is more biased than Fox News.

[obamanut2012]

10. They are very reliable

[hlthe2b]

26. I do find there is at least some level of truthful reporting upon which they base their videos, but

it often gets lost in the hyperbole.

[questionseverything]

35. So out of curiosity, did you know we (usa) has abandoned 13 bases because of drone attacks?

[hlthe2b]

37. THey have a former military official who has a show on the network who just retruned from

Ukraine (and a short time in the ME) who touched on it but it was less than a fleshed out story--more of a "let's keep an eye on this." I will say I suspect there may have been some issues with high ranking leadership electing not to stay on base, but somehow I doubt 13 bases were vacated. NYT has the story, but I have not yet been able to read it yet as I can't archive it on a cell phone.

And you? What do you know/think?

[questionseverything]

39. I hadn't seen it before this video, I think mt is a pretty important website

Nyt paywalls their news so thank goodness mt reports it

[hlthe2b]

25. I think their titles alone probably earned their rating based on their criteria

-both on the standpoint of bias and reliability. Hyperbolic clickbait may be the game on YOUTUBE, but it does not help the reputation.

[OhioBack2Blue]

6. 13 US bases 'uninhabitable' after Iran strikes -- New York Times reporting this. Is that better for you?

....Soldiers moving / moved into hotels, causing US military to have diminished capacity.

What's with the attack on Meidas Touch? (No, I am not a subscriber, but JHC the enemy is on the other side).

[Fiendish Thingy]

8. Clickbait site run by Never-Trump conservatives. Nt

[W_HAMILTON]

12. That doesn't make them wrong.

And, in this case -- as is often the case, from what I've seen -- their commentary is based on reputable reporting from other sources.

From The New York Times:

Iran has bombed U.S. bases across the Middle East in retaliation for the U.S.-Israeli war, forcing many American troops to relocate to hotels and office spaces throughout the region, according to military personnel and American officials.

...

Many of the 13 military bases in the region used by American troops are all but uninhabitable, with the ones in Kuwait, which is next door to Iran, suffering perhaps the most damage. Six U.S. service members were killed in a strike on Port Shuaiba that destroyed an Army tactical operations center. Iranian drones and missiles also targeted Ali Al Salem Air Base, damaging aircraft structures and injuring personnel, and Camp Buehring, damaging maintenance and fuel facilities.

Taken from: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/25/us/politics/iran-us-bases.html

PS - Are you confusing them with The Bulwark? Because the main founder of Meidas Touch has been a long-time Democrat, having interned for several prominent Democratic politicians (including Hillary).

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Meidas is not a news source, they are a clickbait site

Yes, the information in their videos may be accurate, but it is filtered/altered with emotional trigger words to induce the viewer to keep watching and click on more of their videos generating more ad revenue.

As others have noted, they make a 10 second story into a 10 minute video.

Bottom line, they are a business, and their business is manipulating viewers emotions on political issues to get clicks and generate revenue. This is true of Occupy Democrats, the Lincoln Project, Glen Kirchner, and many others.

It will be interesting to see how the Never Trumper sites pivot in the near future, probably right after the midterms. Trump will never again be on the ballot, and the Never Trumpers will likely want to find a lane for conservatives to reclaim power. If Liz Cheney decides to run in 2028, I expect Meidas, Lincoln Project and others to back her.

[W_HAMILTON]

18. "Yes, the information in their videos may be accurate"

That's all that matters here.

The rest of your diatribe is just you voicing you displeasure with the current nature of most social media political commentary outlets.

Yes, most are click-baity.

Yes, most cater towards a particular audience AKA they are biased.

But none of that means they are factually incorrect about something -- and in this particular case, they are commenting on reputable reporting.

[blue-wave]

21. Your argument is that they are a business?

Well I have some news for you. So is every main stream media outlet. Why don't you attack them? Everyone the world over is trying to hustle and make a living. But you are the one who is supposed to make the decision of who can and who can't have a social media channel that makes a living for them? Give me a break.

Our number one concern and objective should be defeating MAGA and restoring America back to a place of peace and prosperity for everyone. Top priorities, they should be front and center.

[Fiendish Thingy]

34. Many people perceive these sites as Public Service/Activist organizations

And some started out that way, but as the post-Trump era approaches, their model has shifted to focus on revenue generation, rather than activism.

But you are the one who is supposed to make the decision of who can and who can't have a social media channel that makes a living for them?

Where did I say that? They are free to run any legal business they want, and I am free to criticize it.

Most Americans get their news from social media, and that is not a good thing.

[Escurumbele]

47. Well said...There is one goal only, that of helping the USA become what it was and better, and to do that we must get ri

of the filth that has taken over USA government.

You put it perfect, well done!

[hlthe2b]

27. Some of the newer 'hires' maybe but not the Meidas Brothers. They have always been Dems.

But, if you read my posts upstream, I agree with the hyperbole and clickbait--problematic way to gain a foothold in the business, but given the move away from traditional media for news, I guess this is going to be the case for awhile.

[RussBLib]

40. I do not believe you are correct about Meidas

Meidas Touch is not a never-Trumper outfit. Lincoln Project? Yes.

I do not believe Meidas is a clickbait site either. Clickbait infers they are intentionally deceptive, misleading, and/or sensationalist. Some of their headlines may indeed be a bit hyperbolic, and they may drag out a point longer than necessary, but clickbait? No.

[Fiendish Thingy]

44. Clickbait is content that uses trigger words to get you to click

It may or may not be deceptive, is almost certainly always subjective, usually emotion based.

The deception may not always be factual in nature, it may be a deceptive interpretation.

[obamanut2012]

9. Yes, they are reliable

Very much so.

Their rather bombastic video titles are because of algorithms for social media sites.

[Princess Turandot]

11. There's an LBN thread on this (the bases, not Meidas Touch) with an article fron the NYT..

https://democraticunderground.com/10143638997

[MineralMan]

13. It has joined the YouTube Clickbait Wars.

I stopped watching its videos some time ago. I refuse to click on videos that shout at me with inaccuracies.

It is no longer a reliable source of news.

[ruet]

14. "ALL HELL IS BREAKING LOOSE."

I can't sand the titles and some of the presentation but they are reliably accurate. I mostly listen for their new roundups.

[Justice]

15. The substance is usually good but the hype is not

They are taking the Gavin Newsom approach - mirroring exaggerated headlines of MAGA.

As others have said, story is in NYT as well. All of our military bases around Iran have suffered damage and our troops are working remotely.

Also, Scott McFarlane joined MediasTouch (well respected CBS News reporter). I don’t think he’d go there if not reputable. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/scott-macfarlane-meidastouch-cbs-news-1236544449/

[czarjak]

17. But...

We did Iwo Jima!

[flvegan]

19. The big yellow arrow, all caps and multiple exclamation points

should have told you. TO SUBSCRIBE AND SMASH THAT LIKE BUTTON WOOT AMIRITE

DU is still otherwise littered with this sort of shit though.

[ABC123Easy]

20. I've found them to be VERY reliable.

Ignore the titles of the videos......now those ARE very unreliable. But.....the content from Ben and his brothers is reliable and verifiable.

[mcar]

22. I will never click on one of those overly dramatic vids

and on their Substack they spend most of their time trolling for subscribers.

However, Ron Filipowski is a good reporter for them.

[617Blue]

24. MTN is very good but the headlines are max clickbait. Substance is good though.

[Wednesdays]

29. Their information is good, but their headlines are exaggerated to the point of distortion.

If you can ignore their headlines, it's a good source.

[SalviaBlue]

30. They are appealing to a certain demographic.

I like it or not (I don’t) there are many people who will not read the New York Times or listen to Rachel Maddow or even network or cable news They will, however, look at videos with this kind of click bait title. Since Meidas Touch are anti-Trump/pro-democracy and for the most part they’re providing real true information they are a benefit to the media environment.

I would recommend them to people who don’t necessarily read their news.

[PJMcK]

31. The affiliated channels are very good

Legal AF is accurate and detailed without being overly hyperbolic. Michael Popok is a bit of a know-it-all but he mostly does! He and his associates are lawyers so of course they're long-winded! Still, very good analysis-focused shows.

Under Color of Law with Shan Wu is excellent and concise.

[boston bean]

33. I am not a fan.

[Scrivener7]

36. The tactics everyone is complaining about have gotten them 2x as many listeners as Joe Rogan.

Some months it's 3x.

We need that. Time for us to stop saying "ick" and support those on our side that appeal to very large audiences.

And their stories are well sourced and accurate. My feeling is, "Whatever you're doing is working. Carry on."

I appreciate them.

[purr-rat beauty]

38. I trust them

But it is getting bombastic and Ben is getting too emotional but many streaming critics are and rightfully so. I appreciate they are bringing more voices to their broadcast so the variety is nice albeit similar messaging. Much better than TYT

[Greg_In_SF]

41. They are

an entertainment source, not a news source.

[carpetbagger]

42. Mixed bag.

The news itself is usually secondhand, but the sources tend to not be fictive.

The presentation is hyperbolic. I think the emotional and sensationalist presentations indirectly misinform in a number of ways. For instance, you'd walk away from 5-10 of those stories thinking the right wing is going to collapse by next payday.

I'll admit that I prefer my news handed to me as concisely as possible, and if I'm going to watch something for 15 minutes I'd prefer to have some in-depth coverage and expert opinion. I'm old school like that, and loitering news-readers bug me as much as much as those AI-written social media posts with the choppy paragraphs full of blustery mind-reading.

That having been said, I think Meidas will improve over time. Charlie Angus is their figurehead in Canada, and he's a serious guy, serious about punk and serious about politics. I think Scott McFarlane joining in the last few days can potentially take it to that point where they're putting out more original and detailed reporting.

[Doodley]

43. Meidas is very reliable. They report what is already published. Nothing fake.

[JI7]

45. It's clickbait but what they actually report is the truth

But when you listen to the actual video you will realize they used clickbait.

I have no problem with it becsuse the other side does it although they actually lie a lot if times.

Many people don't watch the actual video..But they will see the title and image.