The Rise of Zombie Journalism

Politician's outrageous and slanderous lies published by legacy media!

On Friday, 8th October 2021, a Councillor (Cllr.) for my local electoral area of Limerick City West, tweeted the following 

As part of @NWCI #StopOnlineAbuse I will start with my experience of @YouTube. A series of videos has been made about me this yr. This is a compilation of some of those videos. YouTube tells me these are not in violation of guidelines and to deal directly with the content creator pic.twitter.com/kW7tCrkhst

— Cllr Elisa O'Donovan (@elisaodonovan) October 8, 2021

As part of Cllr. O'Donovan's tweet to advertise her participation in an upcoming National Women's Council of Ireland (NWCI) webinar about online abuse, O'Donovan uploaded an out-of-context video compilation of clips from my videos, which identified me as the content creator and prompted her flying monkeys to go on a reporting spree trying to get my YouTube channel taken down. 

Less than eleven hours later and the Irish Examiner got in on the act, publishing an article based entirely on the tweet and some of the replies and describing my videos as "misogynistic."

The Irish Examiner article

This style of journalism, where a load of tweets are cobbled together to produce a copy-and-paste article and where nothing is investigated or verified, is what I like to call zombie journalism.

"The Reporting Dead" is what they would call it if it was a TV show.

Such brain-dead articles have become more and more commonplace in recent years and it is sad to see Irish journalism plumb such depraved depths; I have featured in articles they published in the past, when the journalists took the time to cover every aspect of the story and present all sides. Now, however, it's such a pity to see the bar being lowered so low that you could trip over it.

With zombie journalism there is a complete lack of impartiality and they can't be bothered to even pretend to investigate the story properly.

On Thursday, 14th October 2021, the NWCI held their webinar and it was the turn of the Irish Times to get in on the act with an article that simply quoted verbatim what the various participants had to say and presented it all as if it were fact.

It was interesting to listen to the explanation given by Cllr. O'Donovan about how she got my "Elisa Lies" video on YouTube blocked in Ireland. That video was the exposé on Cllr. O'Donovan and her antics which was starting to go viral. Some say it was the best video on O'Donovan that they've ever seen (and thankfully it was not totally suppressed as it's still available on Bitchute, Odysee and Rumble). 

"I've spoken about my experience of trying to get videos taken down: very misogynistic, really disgusting videos about me on YouTube. I couldn’t get them taken down. First of all, I put in a breach of privacy complaint and I was told to deal directly with the content creator, so they wanted me to deal directly with the person who was abusing me which I obviously did not feel safe to do. The second thing I did then was put in a copyright because they were manipulating my own videos to make me out looking like a witch, and that was also refused. So I had to result in getting a solicitor to put in very specific defamation claims and all that resulted in was some of the videos being blocked in Ireland but they could be viewed in the rest of the world." said Cllr. O'Donovan in the NWCI Zoom call

Nothing that Cllr. O'Donovan said is actually true.

My videos are neither misogynistic nor disgusting and many have described them as informative and witty. 

Cllr. O'Donovan put in a privacy complaint for a 3 minute section in a video of her unhinged antics outside the Sacred Heart Church in Limerick on Palm Sunday this year, it was for the 3 minute exchange that took place between us after she crossed the road to confront me. Her complaint was rejected by YouTube because she was a public representative that was filmed in a public place while claiming to be carrying out her duty as a Councillor; there was no invasion of privacy. 

The only time that YouTube requires the complainant to contact the content creator directly is in the case of a defamation claim and that contact can take the form of an email or letter from the complainant (or their solicitor) to the content creator. I have had absolutely no correspondence from either O'Donovan or her solicitor.

There is absolutely no requirement to call to see the content creator in person, as the mendacious Councillor suggested during the NWCI Zoom call and even if that were the case, why would she fear for her safety? She knows full well that I have never behaved menacingly or threateningly towards her. 

As my video, "Cllr. Elisa O'Donovan calls the Guards (unedited)" (the video that she complained about to YouTube for 'invasion of privacy') shows, she had no problem shouting at me (unprovoked) from across the road, she had no fear whatsoever in walking up to me and recording me up close and in my face, she had no problem walking across the road to me to insult me and make snide remarks about my attempt to help the people in my electoral area. At no time did I approach her, but she saw nothing wrong broadcasting lies about me online and in the local media, saying that I had intimidated and harassed her.

It was her lies to the media and getting her far-left associates in Antifa Limeick to launch an online hate campaign targeting me and my children that prompted me to make the videos in the first place. If Cllr. O'Donovan hadn't lied, there would have been no need for my videos.

Contrary to what Cllr. O'Donovan stated, there is no need to contact the content creator for a YouTube copyright claim, but for copyright claims to be successful they must either go unchallenged (I challenged her claims against my comedy videos under 'fair use') or the complainant must show YouTube that they are taking a court action against the content creator.

Cllr. O'Donovan claims that she had to get a solicitor to make a "specific" defamation claim to YouTube.

YouTube's policy on defamation specifically requires the complainant to contact the content creator directly via email or letter and as I previously stated, I have had absolutely no correspondence whatsoever from either O'Donovan or her solicitor regarding my videos or any other issues for that matter. which means that she got a solicitor to lie to YouTube and claimed that they had attempted to contact me or were issuing court proceedings against me for defamation.

Cllr. O'Donovan is no stranger to taking a defamation case against a private citizen when she feels slighted and offended by what they said about her online. So why hasn't she taken a case against me? 

Could it be that I don't come across as the kind of mark that you could shake down for €10,000 in an out-of-court settlement? Could it be the fact that I would actually relish the opportunity to defend my videos in court? 

I didn't defame O'Donovan at all, she did that all by herself when she made a holy show of herself by harassing Catholics as they prayed the Rosary outside the Sacred Heart Church in Limerick on Palm Sunday.

I did not initiate calling Cllr. O'Donovan a witch, she called herself a witch in a series of tweets; I merely picked up on the fact and portrayed her as a witch simply for comedic effect in light of her own self-identification. She also wore a top calling herself a "gowl," which like the censored 'C' word (c*%#) that she claimed to have caused her so much upset, is a derogatory word for female genitalia. 

"Gowl" is also used as a slang word to describe an annoying person, an idiot and a dishonest person.

G + Owl = Gowl

Unlike the defamation case against a private citizen that Cllr. O'Donovan currently has before Limerick Circuit Court, I have actually named O'Donovan and it is very obvious to all that watch the videos who it is that I'm speaking about. 

In O'Donovan's current defamation case she wasn't actually named at all in the online post that she alleges has defamed her, she simply claims that the post was about her and promptly issued court proceedings. The case has no merit and if it isn't dropped before it is heard then the Judge will undoubtedly throw it out and award costs against O'Donovan. Her defamation case is little more than an abuse of law; a contemptible attempt by a politician to publicly blacken the good name of a private citizen. 

It is absolutely scandalous that media have published this politicians lies about me without question; I am clearly identified in Cllr. O'Donovan's video tweet, which was then embedded unquestionably into the Irish Examiner article. Maybe I should consider taking a defamation case myself?

In the meantime, I will keep making video exposés as they are needed.

Here's my response video to Councillor O'Donovan's latest Twitter hate fest (another one for her and her flying monkeys to complain about):

ANTIFA CALLING: Councillor Elisa O'Donovan and her Far-Left Associates

Here's  a playlist of all my videos featuring Councillor O'Donovan:

The Councillor Elisa O'Donovan Chronicles (6 videos)

And there will be plenty more videos to come. I may not be able to stop the rise of zombie journalism, but when it tries to bite me I can do my best to counter it with my own fringe journalism.

Next up is "Fatal Detraction: The Untold Story of Deputy Brian Leddin and Councillor Elisa O'Donovan" in which i will be taking a closer look at that defamation case of O'Donovan's as well as her fantasy mindset and modus operandi, so be sure to head on over to my YouTube channel to subscribe and hit the bell for notifications, you won't want to miss it.

COMING SOON

A satirical representation of Councillor O'Donovan's Twilight Zone fantasy mindset