Six major stories corporate media ignored: From watchlists to the Epstein files
The stories collectively describe US government actions marked by limited transparency, intimidation tactics and institutional failures to hold powerful figures accountabl
A series of reports published by independent journalists and smaller media outlets have examined allegations of state surveillance, immigration enforcement practices, legislative initiatives and the handling of records related to Jeffrey Epstein.
The stories collectively describe US government actions marked by limited transparency, intimidation tactics and institutional failures to hold powerful figures accountable. Despite online circulation, the reporting has received little attention from major US corporate news organizations, says Project Censored.
1. Epstein files and alleged Israel-linked connections
Michael Arria, writing for Mondoweiss and drawing on reporting from Drop Site News, reported that newly released Epstein-related files point to political and institutional ties between Jeffrey Epstein and Israel. The documents reportedly include communications with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and detail Epstein's attempts to use US presidential candidates to gain Israeli media exposure. The reporting also raised questions about intelligence-linked financial arrangements. These aspects of the file releases have not been covered by major US outlets, with corporate media, including the New York Times, noted by the sources for not reporting on the alleged international dimensions of the case.
2. Alleged watchlists tracking US protesters
Ken Klippenstein reported on his Substack that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) maintain secret watchlists used to monitor American citizens. According to the report, the opaque databases focus on anti-ICE and pro-Palestinian protesters. Civil liberties experts cited in the reporting warned that such surveillance could infringe upon First Amendment protections. The existence and scope of the watchlists have not been addressed by major corporate media outlets.
3. ICE raids and psychological intimidation claims
Nick Turse, reporting for The Intercept, detailed allegations that ICE agents in Colorado left behind "death cards" during immigration raids. Turse reported that the practice mirrors psychological warfare tactics used by the US military during the Vietnam War. Advocates cited in the report said the tactic amounts to racialized intimidation aimed at immigrant communities. The allegations have not been widely examined by mainstream television networks or national newspapers.
4. DOJ handling of Epstein records questioned
Media scholar Nolan Higdon wrote in the Gaslight Gazette that the US Department of Justice mishandled the most recent release of Epstein-related files. Higdon said the department withheld millions of records and failed to adequately redact sensitive information, exposing survivors while protecting powerful co-conspirators. The critique centers on what the sources describe as a broader accountability failure within federal institutions. Higdon's analysis has circulated largely within independent media.
5. Kansas anti-trans bathroom bill
Erin Reed, writing on Erin in the Morning, reported on a legislative effort by Kansas Republicans to pass an anti-trans bathroom bill. The proposal would allow private citizens to act as "bounty hunters" by suing transgender individuals for thousands of dollars for using public bathrooms. Reed described the measure as an effort to force transgender people out of public life through the threat of financial penalties. Coverage of the proposal has remained limited outside niche and advocacy-focused outlets.
6. Expansion of militarized detention infrastructure
Pablo Manríquez, writing for Migrant Insider, reported that DHS is using a repurposed US Navy logistics contract to construct a nationwide network of warehouse jails and tent camps. The reporting said the initiative represents a shift toward a permanent, militarized immigration detention system that operates with minimal public oversight. The expansion has proceeded quietly and has not been the subject of sustained coverage by major corporate media organizations.
