Here's something obvious that's maybe worth saying: there is nothing Garland or the J6 committee could do -- I mean nothing -- that would render investigations of Donald Trump legitimate in the eyes of conservatives.

Nothing.

I often cite Forbes with the caveat that it is "Capitalism's self-consciousness often has insights that are denied the unwashed masses of cable TV."

I excerpted portions of a Forbes article by Martine Paris, WITH ATTRIBUTION to Forbes, and a link to her Mastodon account in the body of the list, but had truncated the introductory line which referenced her. Fair enough that she DM'd me to ask for the correction.

The truncation was error on my part, rapidly corrected. The reason for it was that I have been developing uploadable CSV files of evil domains based on Mastodon instance block lists. These are not usable without extensive deletion of surplus comment. I was fresh off of some of that work when I thought I would provide some positive lists in addition to the evil domains lists. By sheer inertia, I over-cropped the material. My bad.

As soon as this was pointed out to me I immediately added (1) a link to her profile page, which listed the article, and (2) and additional mention at the bottom of the article, amounting then to three mentions for the writer and one for the publication.

Nevertheless, it seemed that she continued contacting people who had boosted, as if the OP had not attributed Forbes in the first place. Nor did her comments reflect the fact that the corrections had been made.

Edit: TBH latency in the system might have caused it to appear as if she was making these contacts post facto.

The interesting mentions at the top of her list were identical to what many instances provide as "suggested accounts to follow" when you sign up. I don't quite buy her characterization of "accounts-to-follow" as the labor of Sisyphus.

Now if she or other journalists are interested in the #IntellectualProperty beat, they might want to look into

(1) that dude who build 4,000 followers his first month by taking the funniest short toots he found on #Explore, completely stripping any attribution, and posting them as his own clever takes to 3,999 fawning admirers.

And (2) the #AIart crowd, which is systematically ripping off every digitized piece of art in the world, largely for the profit of one #ElonMusk

In any case, I imagine Forbes pays pretty well and I don't get a plug nickel for what I am doing and I could be out there doing compensated work rather than building up a bulwark of safety for journalists who are in the trenches.

I am primarily interested in the journalists who are on dangerous or controversial beats and need boosting and the infosec people who protect them.

I included her in my OP only as she had herself listed as a "Celebrity" reporter.
[Dead Horse Thoroughly Whipped on Both Sides]

Yes, we all already know about:
George Takei,
Jim Acostsa,
Mike Mesnick,
Molly Jong Fast
Taylor Lorenz

Now Imma gonna link to this one call it what you will :
Mehdi Hasan, MSNBC (39K) @mehdihasan
I have been boosting him since his first day on Mastodon, from my old account.

In fact, they were recommended to us already by Mastodon.

Now props to Martine for pointing out these accounts:

Donie O’Sullivan, CNN (41K) @donieosullivan
A funny guy I like to watch and who doesn't?

Micah Lee, The Intercept (37K) @micahflee
Now that they have gotten rid of [name redacted not giving exposure to the worst turncoat in the history of journalism], I am all in on the Intercept

Mike Masnick, Techdirt
@[email protected]
One of the accounts banned on Twitter, for reporting...tech news.
Thus is free speech in the reign of #ElonMusk

Steve Herman, Voice of America @w7voa
Been boosting VOA for a long time with my pod cast partner.

If you 'd like to see her full list you can find it on Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/martineparis/2022/12/17/elon-musk-bans-journalists-on-twitter-as-more-flee-to-mastodon-heres-who-to-follow/

OP: @theghostoftomjoad
is also

@avid