From
"They said the film ['Barbie'] promoted homosexuality and insulted the image of women." by Anne Althouse.
She reads in an English newspaper (The Times) of an incident that occurred in France and is trying to understand what happened. Potential barriers to understanding include:
Legacy mainstream media unreliability.
General English interpretation issues about things France.
English and French language issues.
The incident involves French Muslims threatening violence.
As best I can guess from the various accounts, the mayor of Noisy-le-Sec, a suburb of Paris decided they would have an open air screening of the movie Barbie. As municipal workers were setting up the projector and screen, they were surrounded by and threatened by a crowd (up to fifteen) of young Muslims who disliked the movie for various cultural reasons. The municipal workers were afraid to proceed and the Mayor canceled the event.
A best guess and subject to dramatic refinement.
If that is what happened, then you can see where there are so many opportunities for the truth to not come out. Most the news accounts essentially report that something happened in Noisy-le-Sec which stopped the screening of a movie; a formulation which is not particularly useful or informative reporting.
Interestingly, Althouse turns to Grok to cut through all the uninformative legacy media reports and gets:
The screening was abruptly cancelled just before it was set to begin at 9 p.m., after a group of approximately 10 to 15 young residents from the neighborhood confronted and pressured city workers who were installing the equipment. According to Mayor Olivier Sarrabeyrouse (from the French Communist Party, or PCF), the group encircled the agents and issued verbal threats, stating something to the effect of: "If you install [the equipment], we will dismantle everything and put an end to your session." This implied potential physical disruption or damage to the setup, and the mayor described it as threats of violence against public service agents, noting that similar incidents had occurred in the same neighborhood in the past...
Much more informative than the original report in the London Times.
I am struck by two trends of disintermediation, unrelated to one another but in parallel.
Google in recent months has modified its search service. When you ask a question, it will now usually use an AI generated summary of the results of the search and then list the source URLs (as it used to do.)
In this case, if you ask "What happened at Noisy-le-Sec, France" you get the Google AI generated:
In Noisy-le-Sec, France, a planned outdoor screening of the Barbie movie was canceled due to threats from a group of young men who argued the film "promotes homosexuality" and "undermines the image of women". The incident, part of a free summer program, led to the mayor halting the event to ensure public safety. The cancellation sparked a national debate about cultural freedom and censorship.
Which seems true enough but steps delicately around the fact that you have a foreign cultural minority attempting to dictate through violence, the actions of the host French nation. That seems the core issue. Not dissimilar to the Pakistani Rape Gangs in England.
On Google Search, following the AI summary, you get the relatively uninformative URL sources as you would normally have done in the past. Sources which Althouse had already turned to and found further bland and circumspect reporting.
Traffic volume to legacy media site has plunged with the new AI enabled search results. In recent years, legacy media sites have come to depend on referral traffic from search results from Google, With the AI summary now, people read the summary and then no longer click through to the source URLs as they used to do when searching for an answer.
Google Search AI is disintermediating legacy media in fact finding.
Similarly it seems
Grok AI is disintermediating legacy media in truth seeking.
A handful of Muslim toughs close down a public arts event in France through threats and intimidation. And we need AI to find out that is what happened. We are at an odd epistemic place.