
For those reading the above, wondering about this phenomenon, read Baudrilliard's The Gulf War Did Not Take Place. Even if you don't agree with Baudrilliard's overall thesis, the facts he brings up are still cogent (e.g. a photo from the Exon Valdez spill was used instead of an actual photo of the Iraqi military's destruction of Kuwaiti oil fields). The media has been a critical aspect of war since at least the Falklands War.
If you were to actually go see the reality of war what you'd see most of the time is actually soldiers doing nothing, not interating with any enemy. People trying to scrape by, someone fixing a pipe, that kind of thing. LiveLeak was even worse and a better source for propaganda than sensational news.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulf_War_Did_Not_Take_Plac...
It's probably a reference to "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place" by Jean Baudrillard, which took a similar critical view of the Gulf War as TFA takes of the Higgs discovery.
Really interesting place. Lots of cool food and people to talk to with interesting stories. Painful stories, too. Such an overwhelming, disorienting place. Maybe it's changed too, though. The above-ground world we see on the news is stable because it's a mask for the entropic chaos of the underworld, where portals to the unknown pop in and out of existence all around you, and it's easy to get lost and everything disappears all the time, and you'll never be able to know how or why.
The real world is like a tornado made of spaghetti. And the fake world (like in Baudrillard's The Gulf War Did Not Take Place kind of way) feels so much realer and more familiar because it doesn't need to deal with the eccentricities and contradictions of reality, but can safely play with its symbols. Like the difference between making a Yoda out of Legos vs making a real Yoda. Blood and guts and bricks in boxes, flooding over wet dirt.
What a cheesy stunt, which of course makes it so fitting for someone like Mr 𝕏 dot com