What do you guys make of this?

I think one thing that sets Callaghan apart from most journalism majors, is he went to J-school on a congressional scholarship awarded to him for his high school era photo-journalism work.

so right out of the gate there's a level of legitimacy, authenticity, and freedom with Callaghan's body of work that seems to really put the fear in legacy media pundits.

my observation (as a 5th-grade-dropout reddit mod who went into early retirement as a teen over bowel disease) is that those holdover media moguls from the baby generation and gen-z never got to put Callaghan through the demoralizing cub-reporter gang initiation process, and he's retained the kind of fearlessness that the cable/newspaper industry can't coexist with.

and what we are seeing with this is how the league of fat-young-boys, who are largely coerced into doing what they do because any default on their student loans means their parents can lose their family home, ends up cannibalizing Callaghan for outsmarting the system that they're chained to.

Really like the pods, very good interesting guests.

I've heard Andrew mention they try remove the "dead air" when people talk.

I think it's too extreme.

It's like the guests are on one long seamless rant and its difficult to listen to in long sessions.

Really hope the editing becomes less extreme in the long form.

CUSTER

o7

At “an evening of magic, rap battles, and a SECRET documentary screening,” would I discover the future of news?

“Ok I have a wild suggestion” was the text I got from my boyfriend on Feb. 22.

Dylan wanted us to attend a “carnival” featuring the journalist/documentarian/news creator Andrew Callaghan in Medford the following Saturday. Dylan, one of Callaghan’s 3.46 million YouTube subscribers, learned about the tour from watching one of the 28-year-old Channel 5 host’s latest videos. I, the journalist in this relationship, am not one of those 3.46 million subscribers, a point of recurring contention. Dylan argues that, as a reporter working at Nieman Lab where we cover the ~ future of news in a digital age ~ I need to be paying attention to Andrew Callaghan. He frequently tries to get me to watch his videos.

“The overtly comedic (and often quite crude) videos he posted [at first] did not seem like pinnacles of journalistic integrity,” Dylan wrote in what is, essentially, a pitch I forced him to write about Callaghan. That started to change in the summer of 2020, after the killing of George Floyd, when Callaghan put out a six-minute “Minneapolis protest” video.

“While local and national outlets looped clips of protesters getting tear-gassed, the looting and burning of a Target, and the razing of a police precinct, Callaghan’s coverage of the protest was unlike anything else I saw at the time,” Dylan told me, because Callaghan actually talked to protestors, including those setting buildings on fire. (The people Callaghan interviewed didn’t mince words about their view of other news organizations: “Fuck those other media outlets because they’re going to try to portray us in a bad light by only showing what’s going on over here,” one says in the video, gesturing toward a burning building.)

Callaghan has since covered a Hollywood antivax rally and the Irish Language Revival and hopped the border and gotten arrested. (He reports in both English and Spanish and has launched a Spanish-language version of Channel 5.) Dylan thinks one of his reporting fortes is humanizing, solutions-oriented coverage of homelessness and addiction in cities across the U.S. Mainstream journalists sometimes appear as guests or partners; Callaghan recently interviewed Washington Post corporate accountability reporter Douglas MacMillan about the horrific conditions at ICE detention centers. He also partnered with Shane Smith of Vice News on Greenland coverage. And we haven’t even gotten to all the downright weird stuff that was initially his bread and butter (think Satanic temple gathering, the Pennsylvania Bigfoot conference).

One major finding from last year’s RISJ Digital News Report was that social and video networks had finally overtaken TV as Americans’ top news source, “supporting a sense that traditional journalism media in the U.S. are being eclipsed by a shift toward online personalities and creators.” Social media and video networks are the main news source for over half of under-35-year-olds in the United States. Dylan and I are both 27, and we exemplify different sides of the data; he gets a decent amount of news from TikTok and YouTube, while I remain an avid reader and listener of (too much) news from The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Boston Globe, and the like, but get almost no news from YouTube and don’t have a TikTok account. “People who don’t watch the news watch me,” Callaghan told Nieman Lab in 2022. “People who watch the news don’t watch me.”

This brings me back to Dylan’s wild suggestion. Here, a 10-minute drive away, was an opportunity to absorb some Andrew Callaghan live and bridge our divided house of news.

con't at https://www.niemanlab.org/2026/03/reluctantly-learning-from-my-boyfriends-favorite-news-creator/

o7

I remember being a kid and thinking GG Allin was sort of cool, but as time went on, you saw he was a deeply troubled guy who relied on shocking everyone and didn't have that much talent. Was he entertaining? Oh yeah. Was he sort of sad looking back on it? Yep. The guy who owned the local record shop used to say how much GG sucked and that he went to his last show out of curiosity. He said it became sad and exploitative rather than fun to go. Todd Phillips had that doc that said the same thing.

I feel the same way about Sigil Kult and their whole vibe, where they don’t have much talent, self-promote, and do antisocial and self-destructive things on camera. Both are extremely problematic.

I do wonder if most people feel the same way about Sigil Kult now as people felt about GG back in the day, and if people will view these people the way GG is viewed now, with a bit of reverence.

Was sort of thinking something similar recently about how he's jumped the shark when he said "JD Vance is the Clavicular of politics"

intro to article below

Andrew Callaghan made a career out of being something incredibly rare: a great listener. We think of a guy in a baggy suit with a mic outstretched toward some deranged protestor, tailgater, or conspiracy theorist, silently blinking and nodding along while they rant, rave, or (surprisingly often) rap. He interviews them in their natural habitats—in bar doorways, house party bathrooms, depressing motel rooms, under bridges. We have always accepted his premise, that they are the documented and he is the documentarian. But what if Andrew’s been the subject all along?

In recent years, to balance his platforming of the dangerously misinformed, Andrew branded himself as an expert in counter-conspiracy. He anchored a Jubilee video titled “1 Journalist vs 20 Conspiracy Theorists.” He gave an interview to Doomscroll about his “Theory of Radicalization.” A Gizmodo explainer featured him lecturing on “How Conspiracy Theories have dominated the web.”

In the Jubilee video, he begins by defending the following proposition: “QAnon is a baseless conspiracy theory. There's no evidence of a global cabal of Satan-worshipping child trafficking elites that control everything.”

Fast-forward to two weeks ago, and Callaghan goes viral for a conspiratorial rant in which he sounds identical to the people he interviews. In the clip he states that: Israel killed Charlie Kirk with the help of Erika Kirk, Israel is also going to kill Trump with a fake trans leftist shooter, JD Vance is having an affair with Erika Kirk, and that JD Vance is going to institute martial law, serve as the final President of the Republic, and is currently the “Clavicular of Politics.” The mind reels.

Journalism is when you report facts. Recently, Channel 5 has been spreading lies.

In his interview with Congressman Ro Khanna, Andrew confidently claims that Ghislaine Maxwell was “instrumental in moderating /pol/” on 4chan and thus was partially responsible for creating QAnon, which he says was backed by Israel but also was 90% correct about everything (it just contained 10% bullshit like “flat earth” and “Anunnaki lizard people” to make all the other true stuff also seem crazy).

But literally not one single aspect of that is true at all. There is no evidence to suggest any of that is true.

Despite trying to seem like a super-serious military operation, every specific QAnon prediction was wrong (but Q himself actually did explicitly denounce Flat Earth and moon conspiracy theories), we know that Russia (not Israel) did the phishing hacks that ignited Pizzagate and QAnon, and we know that Ghislaine had nothing to do with 4chan at all. (Andrew is just mixing up the fact that Epstein had lunch with Christopher Poole once, and he’s jumbling that with a different debunked conspiracy theory about people who thought they had discovered Ghislaine’s personal Reddit account.)

In that same video, Ro Khanna also (twice) spreads the easily debunked hoax that the Epstein Files contain emails about a “9-year-old Brazilian,” but those emails actually reference a 19-year-old Brazilian from a modeling agency. Ro says that email about a 9 year old girl is "most emblematic" of what was going on, but actually that was just a formatting error that occurred in one of the multiple copies. There's no evidence that Epstein's victims were that young.

I'm obviously not defending Epstein or Ghislaine, but it's worth being accurate and understanding what they actually did. Andrew and his guests seem to have little concern with facts or reality.

In Andrew’s recent interview with Maggie Freleng, she claims that the Epstein Files contained pizza-related code words referencing “eating kids,” and Andrew responds by telling her how crazy it is that QAnon turned out to be “right about so much stuff.”

The Epstein Files do not contain pizza-related code words, nor is there any evidence that Epstein was a cannibal. I read every single email that contains the word “pizza,” and they are all obvious references to the Italian food. All the actual references to sex trafficking basically just refer to the girls as “girls.” Sex traffickers have never used "pizza" as a codeword to refer to girls. This is a hoax.

During that video, Channel 5 editors display a Pizzagate meme that features an AI-generated image of Epstein eating pizza and a fake, Photoshopped image that falsely implies that these 4chan hoax code words came from the FBI. They are just carelessly promoting the debunked Pizzagate hoax and erronesouly suggesting QAnon was almost entirely correct.

In this conversation, Maggie Freleng also lies about the case of Alisha Burns, who she baselessly claims was innocent, despite Alisha pleading guilty and despite the Nevada Supreme Court rejecting her appeal and despite the evidence that Alisha helped to choke and stomp on the neck of a man during a robbery that ended with him dead, tied and gagged in a bathtub. Maggie uses her dishonest misrepresentation of this case to advocate for abolishing all prisons and all police, which I personally think is a very stupid idea, even if she wasn't lying about the evidence.

Andrew then unironically recommends that people buy guns and move to bunkers because J.D. Vance is going to be the final president and the nation as we know it is ending.

He tells us that Israel killed Charlie Kirk and now is planning to assassinate Trump too.

Apparently Corpus Christi is a "dead city" and currently being evacuated due to imminent resource scarcity.

In terms of journalistic integrity, I see no meaningful difference between Andrew’s 5CAST and Alex Jones’s old Infowars. Neither of these things is journalism.

The reason old All Gas No Brakes and Channel 5 videos were so compelling is that Andrew plays the straight man and just holds up a microphone in front of crazy people, and we get to laugh at them saying crazy shit. But unfortunately, Andrew has become a character in one of his own videos. He is now that crazy person.

Is there crossover here from folks who watch channel 5 and who have seen the “friends keep secrets “podcast?( technically not a podcast ;) )

On their episode with Hunter Biden he mentioned how he “was just on Andrew’s podcast” . I think it would be a fun and interesting convo I’d enjoy watching. anyone else ?

I’m Daniel O' Bailey, the interviewer. I made this.

Near the end, Ferris tells a story that changed the way I see Hunter. Sandy had just told him, “We only have $400 left in the bank.” When Ferris told Hunter that Rolling Stone had fired him and would not pay severance, Hunter said, “Do you need any money? I could send you $400.”

Ferris also talks about growing up poor in South Florida; discovering astronomy and blues through books and shortwave radio; Mars, deep time, Hunter’s work habits and generosity, Patti Smith, and rebuilding the Voyager Golden Record.

The Daniel Show Episode #1

Tell me what stayed with you. Drop the timestamp in the comments.

o7

Hey everyone, I feel like I'm going crazy here.

I swear there was either a video, or a self-promotion in another video, or a clip, or something that was Channel 5 interviewing adult babies and their "carer". But I have flicked through every Channel 5 video I've watched and cannot find it anywhere. I'm pretty sure it was only a short segment, not the full video as that was for Patrons, but I could be wrong.

Am I just going crazy? Or is this video segment out there, somewhere?

Edit: Thank you everyone! I'm not sure what All Gas No Brakes is but looks like it's time for me to learn something new 😁

Title says it all, purchased 48 hour rental yet the video says it doesn't exist.

what the heck are we supposed to do with this? WINTER IS COMING

maybe post your pets in the comments - things have gotten way too serious here this week.

I forget the video and can't seem to find it, but I think it takes place in the Northeast? Definitely in the USA. And there is a dude (I think with dreads) that basically says the best thing someone can do to be a part of their community is get a bike and rip around.

I live by this philosophy too and would appreciate help finding the video!

I think we all know what GN is, since Andrew has been promoting it for as long as I can remember. But for those unaware, GN presents itself as an unbiased news aggregator that helps us understand the biases of media outlets and position them on a left–center–right political spectrum.

Well, it turns out Ground News is essentially a conservative "psy-op" intended to whitewash corporate media and make us believe that there is such a thing as left-wing independent corporate media, by pushing the Overton window rightward so that something that is obviously conservative is now regarded as center, and something that is center is now considered left-wing. GN is aimed at people who want to be clear-eyed, but it gives them a false sense of understanding of media bias.

In capitalism, where every corporate media outlet is a profit-driven machine, there is no such thing as unbiased or objective media. The ones that regard themselves as objective are, in effect, "pro-status quo." There is an interesting video on YT that talks about this through the history of news media and how there is no real objectivity in the medium. It also ties GN into the whole story. It's called something like "Ground News and the War on Reality." Go check it out if you want to learn more.

Ground News is also founded, invested in, and run by very sketchy conservative people. It was founded by two siblings, one being a venture capitalist and the other an engineer. These people are not journalists. GN is a subsidiary of Snapwise Inc., which has more venture capitalists and people from finance on its board. It's connected to other organizations that are run by other rich people.

It bases its ratings of media outlets on the work of three other companies: AllSides (whose CEO is a Republican and whose director of communications and bias services is an ally of Donald Trump's Patriot Party), Ad Fontes Media (founded by an intellectual property lawyer who currently works as a real estate investor and advisor for Nouveau Riche, which was exposed as an MLM scam), and Media Bias Fact Check (owned and run by a single guy who considers himself apolitical, as if that's a good thing). Ground News is run and owned by rich people whose interests are not in objectivity and truth, but in their money.

The reason I'm writing all of this here is because Channel 5ive deleted my comment regarding Ground News on their latest YT video so I came here. Andrew is literally the most famous independent gonzo-style journalist in the Western Hemisphere. I won't go into Andrew's politics, which, from the left perspective, could still be seen as problematic, but I will hold him to the standard of the independent gonzo journalist that he is, and therefore he should be skeptical and critical of a corporate organization run by conservatives like GN.

GN is boosting a lot of content around YT. The problem is that Channel 5 is a reputable independent news source, and it should be critical of GN instead of giving it legitimacy.

What do you guys think? I hope we can have a discussion about this and draw Andrew's attention to this issue.

EDIT:

Okay, so I see a bunch of you are making essentially irrelevant "counterarguments," but I'm gonna address them anyway:

1) I did not present all the evidence, with all the references, because this is a Reddit post, not a scientific article. However, I have pointed in certain directions, and I hope you do the research on your own. A YouTuber called Literal Machine has made two comprehensive videos on this subject. That's are a good start.

2) I'm not saying Andrew should not have sponsors because all possible sponsors are organizations run by rich people. I'm saying that this particular sponsor is in direct conflict with what Andrew is doing. He is presenting himself as an independent gonzo journalist, and as such, he should be critical of an organization that is skewing the perception of media bias in favor of the ruling class. Also, does Channel 5 really need a corporate sponsor at all? Maybe I'm out of my depth here, but isn't his Patreon already enough?

3) Unless you believe that such a thing as a ruling class and the interests of capital don't exist, and that conservative media bias is not a dominant force in the world we live in, me having a leftist anti-capitalist perspective is irrelevant to the discussion. When you call me a tankie you are doing an adhominem.

I hope you can address the issue in good faith. We are fans of Channel 5 because we are tired of corporate media bias, and we feel that Andrew is giving us a perspective that's rare in today's media landscape. So I think it's reasonable to address the fact that he is sponsored by an organization that does exactly what we are against.

Do y’all remember when the c5now announcements had Andrew saying there would be a new film “every single week starting right now”? Well we still haven’t gotten a new documentary. It has not been that long but it has still been longer than advertised.

Hi, just went to cue at Les 3 Luxembourg in Paris. Asked the lady at the desk if one could get tickets already, got the answer thet the screening might be cancelled. Anyone who can confirm? Cheers!

o7

o7

I really enjoyed the 5cast interview with Maggie, but I guess I’m not understanding people’s stance on completely getting rid of prison. My thoughts on it are full of nuance and my own personal experiences, and idk if I’m just being ignorant or if I’m not fully comprehending what she means by completely eradicating the prison system.

I know someone who was a pedo, a serial rpist, and serial / spree killer. He was in prison most of my life for the sexual assaults, but about 10 years ago, he was caught up using DNA and put away for life. Because of my closeness to that, I don’t see a world where that could be reformed. Sure, he was a child once who was let down by the system, more than likely experienced his own abuse, but I feel that once people cross into that territory, they should stay in prison.

I heard Andrew say the “John Wayne gacy” thing, but truly, I just want to know what the expectation would be for people like that. I’m all for prison reform, and I am fully aware that I’m half an idiot and I could be finding myself in that “but what about xyz” camp, but I truly just want to know what people’s ideas are when it comes to people who commit crimes like that, when they speak on prison reform.