|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
I mentioned this randomly lots of times in this thread but journalism is suffering right now is because print media is being consumed less. Cord-cutting cuts into cable news revenue. The younger generation relies on online media streams instead of buying newspapers. Journalism is expected to take place on the web and in print now, and the shift to the web has not been easy. This has a number of negative effects that we're now seeing.
Before I dive into that, I want to first note that trust in media has been dropping a lot way before the Internet has become huge, and way before this election or the last. But maybe this is the final straw.
The shift towards online media has negatively affected the media revenue stream. Physical newspapers sell at a relatively stable pace because the core newspaper audience consistently buys newspapers daily/weekly/monthly. Online newspapers rely on ads revenue and subscriptions. Any subscription service suffers from barrier to entry inertia, so most media is ads based.
The problem with ad revenue is that ad revenue is generated by cost per impression (CPI). That means news outlets don't make as much money unless lots of people view their content, by say, loading a page with ads on it. Impression revenue is generally <1cent per impression, so like, you need a lot of impressions to get anything. A 20-minute article on a page doesn't necessarily generate 20x more impressions than a 1-minute article, which pushes news outlets away from longer, in-depth exposes. You generally get many, many more smaller articles alongside bigger ones now.
Ads have turned into invasive ads which have given rise to the adblock, which has really been a killer to online media publications. Facebook and Twitter and Reddit and other sites have made viral content the norm, which kills dependable traffic due to its unpredictability, and pushes ad buyers onto the other platforms. There's a host of ad related problems.
Another wonderfully unique problem with ad revenue is the rise of clickbait. This is a problem of CPI, where keeping you on the website as long as possible generates more impressions, which increases revenue.
Your first impression of an article is the title of the article, and psychologically, titles that trigger certain mental emotions such as curiosity ("You won't believe ...!"), shock ("People dying from strange new drug!"), numbers ("10 Things Obama did ..."), affirmation ("Voting for Obama is right"), and more, and combined together. Unconsciously, these titles lure you to their content much more effectively. Something like, "Effects of Prefrontal Cortext Stimulation" versus "6 Scientifically Proven Ways To Boost Your Self-Control".
This psychological weakness combined with ads revenue means that certain kinds of titles, and especially certain kinds of content, generate revenue better than other kinds of content. For example, biased content that reaffirms a viewpoint engages readers more effectively that content that is neutral in tone. This also means that content that forces critical thinking and re-evaluation is impressed upon less, and generates less revenue. Another example is content that generates shock and rage are more clickable, so shocking readers with information gets better hits.
Clickbait seems like an inevitable result with the rise of the Internet. What the Internet has done is make a vast amount of information available to a huge population. Psychologically, we are unable to process this vast amount of information. For the Internet generation, every second we are online we are bombarded with huge numbers of information. For example, every single thread title and news piece on this TeamLiquid forum is something else our brain reads and processes. Our brain needs shortcuts, which leads to people skimming the titles for information instead of reading all the content. There is just too much content to read. And reading only the titles means that biasing the title to engage the reader becomes much more effective.
A secondary result of this information processing is also the phenomena of information overload. In any given day you will forget most of all the content you read because there is so much of it. You don't even consciously remember reading a lot of things the next day, or if you do remember, you tend to misremember the contents. Again, your brain has to take lots of shortcuts. What this information overload has done is kill reporting accuracy.
It becomes more important to be the first to report it to get the most impressions. Reporting the news as it happens is necessary, and you can cross-check the details later. Repeating the latest popular content as quickly as possible makes more money than verifying it first.
What this means in the world of information overload is that you can get away with lots of low-quality, potentially wrong content, and then follow up with a correction article, and readers will still read because there is so much other information to process that it's easier to just accept it and move on. Being right isn't so important if readers will still read it.
Another piece of the puzzle is the explosion of responsibilities. A journalist nowadays doesn't only attend an event and write a summary article. Journalists are expected to attend all events, tweet constantly during the event and after, blog on related content, engage with commenters, all the while working for less and less because of rising competition, competition with upcomers who work for exposure rather than money, freelancing on the side for more money, and while writing their current article and preparing for the next. It's a recipe for killing the quality of content.
There are a lot more factors to the declining trust in media. Large media outlets are just completely unable to sustain themselves financially without outside help. There are no only media outlets that are large and only post high quality and self-sustainable. It's hard.
I mentioned the shift towards ad revenue, the rise of clickbait, information overload, and tired journalists. Here are some more things that totally do not help at all either.
Tabloid media is absolutely killer. However good the quality of print media is, petty squabbling on TV just makes the outlet sound like absolute idiots. A few people on TV can completely ruin the outlet's reputation because they're so high profile. Paparazzi news alongside with real news is worthless and drags its image.
Left bias is a real thing, however much liberalism is about respecting both and all sides. Most journalists are liberal, I would like to say because good, impartial writing depends on the ability to place yourself in different shoes. That doesn't mean though, that the shoes are always correct, which is where the liberal bias creeps in, and alienates the other sides.
The other sides recognize the existence of liberal bias, so a common strategy is to play interference and yell foul at everything, hoping that at least some accusations stick, and enough times to get the benefit of the doubt on either side. People tend to focus on the outliers as well - it's easy to focus on one or many wrong instances instead of the thousands of correct instances.
Power distribution screws up with perception. Regardless of whether there's anything sinister, the idea of the little man taking on the big guy and winning is seductive. Media is concentrated around a few huge companies. Big companies are less transparent about what's going on at the top. Media outlets are owned by rich board members, who own many other stuff, often with conflicting interests. Fighting against the big bad guy is seductive, so big news outlets can't be trusted, we should trust alternative sources.
Trust in Congress has taken a huge dive alongside trust in media. When it looks like the government and the media talk about and work on about issues that aren't truly important to you, and say things that don't apply at all to you, you will grow tired of listening to them. Government is an amazingly boring black box where it's really easy to make assumptions of things because there's so little information. Civics education is down. Obstruction is rampant. The number of Senators means most of them are mysterious objects. When they don't get the job done they are evil.
There are a lot of real problems going on with the media today. If you talk to any real journalist, they'll gladly tell you how much effort they put in to be accurate, and how much effort they take to be impartial, and how much they care about getting the facts to people. There are reasons to be wary of big media, but there are also many reasons to not be so, reasons that are not all about the media. This is not a black and white war.
|
Ultimately I'd say that a lot of business models were pretty badly fucked by the long-term abuse of internet ads that destroyed a lot of goodwill and led people to use Adblock. For a long time I didn't want to use it, but some bad actors really forced my hand on that front.
|
On November 20 2016 12:51 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 12:43 LegalLord wrote:
At the end of the day I expect an SoS who will pretty much just pursue the status quo. I hardly expect anyone who will really pursue anything but the same old fare that we've seen for the past few decades. All of Trump's selections so far have been outsiders, with the arguable exception of Sessions. I expect that trend to continue. And I don't think that this presidency will be a status quo presidency.
Does the fact that Sessions was deemed too racist to be a judge in 86 not bother you?
|
On November 20 2016 16:06 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 12:51 xDaunt wrote:On November 20 2016 12:43 LegalLord wrote:
At the end of the day I expect an SoS who will pretty much just pursue the status quo. I hardly expect anyone who will really pursue anything but the same old fare that we've seen for the past few decades. All of Trump's selections so far have been outsiders, with the arguable exception of Sessions. I expect that trend to continue. And I don't think that this presidency will be a status quo presidency. Does the fact that Sessions was deemed too racist to be a judge in 86 not bother you?
Nope, because I consider it to be another gross misapplication of the term "racist." And it's not even clear that that's the real reason why his nomination was held up, anyway.
|
Canada11439 Posts
On November 20 2016 15:31 LegalLord wrote:
Ultimately I'd say that a lot of business models were pretty badly fucked by the long-term abuse of internet ads that destroyed a lot of goodwill and led people to use Adblock. For a long time I didn't want to use it, but some bad actors really forced my hand on that front.
Yeah. Among the more frustrating things was when streaming videos was rather iffy and you had auto loading ads. Click video, watch ad, watch part of video, video stops. Reload, watch same ad, click ahead to where you were when it stopped, watch the ad again, have the video stop again. Repeat process again. I very quickly found ad block after that, using it as a default and only unblocking sites I was specifically supporting. Oh, and then there were 1 or 2 minute ads for 30 second video clips. Seriously? And that's the respectable sites, nevermind all those janky pop up ads that intentionally make closing the ad difficult.
|
|
|
On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts?
Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke
User was warned for this post
|
A little bit of background on the Sessions nomination: The Borking trial run.
Now that Jeff Sessions is Donald Trump's pick for attorney general, you're going to hear a lot of people dig up old accusations that Sessions is a racist. In fact, CNN did so last night. However, between the nature of the accusations and Sessions's actual record of desegregating schools and taking on the Klan in Alabama, it strains credulity to believe that he is a racist.
These accusations all center around the bruising judicial nomination process Sessions went through in 1986. Ronald Reagan had tapped Sessions to serve on the federal bench and the Senate judiciary committee ultimately rejected him after they heard testimony that he had supposedly called the ACLU and NAACP "un-American" and "communist-inspired," as well as made racist remarks. The accusations came from Thomas Figures, a black assistant U.S. attorney who worked for Sessions who said Sessions called him "boy" and had made a joke about how he thought the KKK was "O.K. until [he] found out they smoked pot." Another prosecutor, J. Gerald Hebert, said Sessions had called a white lawyer "a disgrace to his race" for representing black clients.
There is no concrete reason to doubt Figures or Herbert. Sessions vehemently denied calling Figures "boy," but he didn't rebut the substance of some of the claims—though he asserted they were taken out of context. It's not exactly inaccurate to point out that the NAACP and ACLU were "communist-inspired." He said he thought it absurd to think he would make a pro-KKK joke considering he was prosecuting the Klan at the time he made the remark. And for what it's worth, Figures also directed accusations at a another assistant U.S. Attorney who worked with Figures. That assistant U.S. Attorney also said Figures wasn't telling the truth and defended Sessions's integrity. Ultimately, the charges were no more than hearsay.
However, it's worth noting that Senator Ted Kennedy, on the Senate judiciary committee at the time, seemed heavily invested in tanking Sessions nomination. The next year, Kennedy's crusade was to sink Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court, which has generally been regarded as a shameful smear campaign ever since. The episode upended the comity that had previously existed between the Senate and the White House on Supreme Court nominations—Antonin Scalia was approved to the court 98-0 the year before, the same year that Sessions was filleted by Kennedy and Democrats on the judiciary committee. Perhaps Sessions was a trial run for "Borking."
www.weeklystandard.com
|
Canada11439 Posts
Maybe so, but I'm not overly fond of the idea of booing the president or vice-president elect wherever they go. It might be cathartic, but I don't think it's a very effective form of protest.
|
On November 19 2016 09:44 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2016 09:17 Nebuchad wrote:
So I've had to go and read the Establishment conservative's guide to the alt-right, thx guys...
"The media empire of the modern-day alternative right coalesced around Richard Spencer during his editorship of Taki’s Magazine. In 2010, Spencer founded AlternativeRight.com, which would become a center of alt-right thought."
This part, listed under intellectuals (of the alt-right), highlights an element that they present as crucial to the development of the alt-right, the foundation of AlternativeRight.com by Richard Spencer. Richard Spencer who in my echo chamber has been described in unsavory terms, advocating among other things, for the sterilization of other races. This didn't appear in the breitbart article though. Nor did I find out that Spencer has literally organized an event in collaboration with a neonazi group at UC Berkeley.
What did appear, though, under the "1488ers": a repudiation of basically nazis, the "true racists", followed by:
"Based on our research we believe this stands in stark contrast with the rest of the alt-right, who focus more on building communities and lifestyles based around their values than plotting violent revolution."
So my initial question is: are we allowed to criticize those intellectuals of the alt-right, and following that, their characterization as contrasting starkly with true racists? My understanding of the Alt-Right started with that guide, but I've since rejected it. The roots of the Alt-Right are undeniably in white nationalism (as the guide discusses) and white identitarianism. I think an argument can be made that the Alt Right also incorporates identitarian politics revolving around culture (namely Western culture), but once you untether the Alt Right from its identitiarian foundation, the term loses meaning.
So you're saying alt-right is a synonym for white identity politics? And apparently, cis-male white identity politics, given the undertone of social conservatism in alt-right posts (with the anti-SJW rants and all).
So... identity politics is fine, as long as it's your identity?
|
On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts?
Did Trump actually get triggered and is advocating for a safe space?
Or is this supposed to be sarcasm?
|
On November 20 2016 17:11 TheFish7 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke
Why ? It's the logical evolution of your segregative system. Mike Pence's error was that he came to watch a show made for blacks right ?
|
On November 20 2016 19:33 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 17:11 TheFish7 wrote:On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke Why ? It's the logical evolution of your segregative system. Mike Pence's error was that he came to watch a show made for blacks right ? it's exactly what i was thinking a while back. Trump is a perfect representant of the new liberal wave.
one of his main campaign points was the desire to make US a safe space(literally). sure people took it as isolationism, exclusionism and bashed it but(ironically) that is what a safe space is.
if you look at the US election organically, Trump won because he had to win and he had to win because, ideologically, he was representing the emerging current at the time.
|
Where do we stand on the notion that Trump is going to do rallies and enjoy his popularity while Pence is going to do most of the actual governing?
|
On November 20 2016 17:11 TheFish7 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke
Plus the fact that the post-show remarks towards Pence made by the cast were super respectable, considering how much so many Americans have to lose from having Pence as the VP. The cast was remarkably gentle in their "please think about all Americans as you govern" approach.
It was just another example of Trump flipping out over normal discourse. Reminds me of how Trump flipped out when Obama supported the pro-Trump supporter's rights to speak at Obama's rally, insisting that Obama was mean to the anti-Trump protester.
Trump just makes up shit for no reason; he just seems really, really bored. It's not even that he makes mountains out of molehills; he fabricates mountains out of perfectly flat land!
|
On November 20 2016 23:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 17:11 TheFish7 wrote:On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke Plus the fact that the post-show remarks towards Pence made by the cast were super respectable, considering how much so many Americans have to lose from having Pence as the VP. The cast was remarkably gentle in their "please think about all Americans as you govern" approach. It was just another example of Trump flipping out over normal discourse. Reminds me of how Trump flipped out when Obama supported the pro-Trump supporter's rights to speak at Obama's rally, insisting that Obama was mean to the anti-Trump protester. Trump just makes up shit for no reason; he just seems really, really bored. It's not even that he makes mountains out of molehills; he fabricates mountains out of perfectly flat land!
The whining in unreal.
How many whiny tweets over nothing of consequence are there going to be? Really making America look strong...
|
On November 21 2016 00:12 ZapRoffo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 23:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 20 2016 17:11 TheFish7 wrote:On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Republicans advocating for safe spaces to save themselves from gay, black actors. what a joke Plus the fact that the post-show remarks towards Pence made by the cast were super respectable, considering how much so many Americans have to lose from having Pence as the VP. The cast was remarkably gentle in their "please think about all Americans as you govern" approach. It was just another example of Trump flipping out over normal discourse. Reminds me of how Trump flipped out when Obama supported the pro-Trump supporter's rights to speak at Obama's rally, insisting that Obama was mean to the anti-Trump protester. Trump just makes up shit for no reason; he just seems really, really bored. It's not even that he makes mountains out of molehills; he fabricates mountains out of perfectly flat land! The whining in unreal. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/800329364986626048How many whiny tweets over nothing of consequence are there going to be? Really making America look strong...
Agreed. While when it comes to social and national policies, I'm more worried about Pence, I'm also terrified of just how little tact, professionalism, and common sense Trump has been displaying (and will clearly display) when it comes to diplomacy with foreign leaders. He has no idea how to act or speak like an empathetic, intelligent human being, and I worry that he'll mess up foreign relationships. He has to understand that he needs to work with other countries to make our country- and the entire world- a better place.
|
On November 20 2016 19:31 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Did Trump actually get triggered and is advocating for a safe space?
As our new POTUS would say, "Wrong."
Or is this supposed to be sarcasm?
His tweets continue to expose the madness that is the left's identity politics.
|
On November 21 2016 00:32 zshBar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2016 19:31 Acrofales wrote:On November 20 2016 09:58 Jormundr wrote:On November 20 2016 09:43 Danglars wrote:On November 20 2016 04:34 WhiteDog wrote:Trump and Pence actually benefit from this kind of stupid and unorganized mobilization, because booing stupidly, or destroying a few cars during a protest is totally unproductive. If you want to be violent, then be it, but organize, play collective, be intelligent, try to legitimize your actions, or you lose support. The mass don't understand the legitimacy of such behavior ("the man can't watch a show normally now ?"). We have the same idiot with high morals in France : running around, throwing rocks at police men and all, fighting against the "police state" and "facism" (when they can't defend it... huh), attacking everything and everyone that does not think as they do (even people who are also on the far left). They are the useful idiots of the right. 1. They didn't interrupt a performance. The performance was over. In the article it is said that "The show was occasionally disrupted by more loud booing at Pence." so they did interrupt it. Yes, you're right. There's video to back it up. I don't know how much factual investigation anyone is expected to do anymore before pointing out that something is factually wrong. The bigger question is how long will it be that a liberal audience is reported to leave the political differences at home due to their politeness and let another figure enjoy a damn musical in peace. Very nice aside, but would you return to the original argument you made which was directed at the CAST of Hamilton? It's neat that the audience interrupted the show but that has literally nothing to do with what we're talking about, which is the CAST. Let's point out where we started again: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799972624713420804https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/799974635274194947Are you still with us or did you get lost trying to move the goalposts? Did Trump actually get triggered and is advocating for a safe space? As our new POTUS would say, "Wrong."
He didn't use the official term "safe space" afaik, but yes that's what he advocated. It's not a judgment on whether or not safe space are good, but it's certainly hypocritical coming from a guy who bashes everyone.
On November 21 2016 00:32 zshBar wrote:His tweets continue to expose the madness that is the left's identity politics.
What does that even mean? Could you please elaborate? From what I can see, the only thing that Trump's tweets are exposing is just how unfit his temperament is to be the future leader of the free world.
|
On November 20 2016 19:28 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2016 09:44 xDaunt wrote:On November 19 2016 09:17 Nebuchad wrote:
So I've had to go and read the Establishment conservative's guide to the alt-right, thx guys...
"The media empire of the modern-day alternative right coalesced around Richard Spencer during his editorship of Taki’s Magazine. In 2010, Spencer founded AlternativeRight.com, which would become a center of alt-right thought."
This part, listed under intellectuals (of the alt-right), highlights an element that they present as crucial to the development of the alt-right, the foundation of AlternativeRight.com by Richard Spencer. Richard Spencer who in my echo chamber has been described in unsavory terms, advocating among other things, for the sterilization of other races. This didn't appear in the breitbart article though. Nor did I find out that Spencer has literally organized an event in collaboration with a neonazi group at UC Berkeley.
What did appear, though, under the "1488ers": a repudiation of basically nazis, the "true racists", followed by:
"Based on our research we believe this stands in stark contrast with the rest of the alt-right, who focus more on building communities and lifestyles based around their values than plotting violent revolution."
So my initial question is: are we allowed to criticize those intellectuals of the alt-right, and following that, their characterization as contrasting starkly with true racists? My understanding of the Alt-Right started with that guide, but I've since rejected it. The roots of the Alt-Right are undeniably in white nationalism (as the guide discusses) and white identitarianism. I think an argument can be made that the Alt Right also incorporates identitarian politics revolving around culture (namely Western culture), but once you untether the Alt Right from its identitiarian foundation, the term loses meaning. So you're saying alt-right is a synonym for white identity politics? And apparently, cis-male white identity politics, given the undertone of social conservatism in alt-right posts (with the anti-SJW rants and all). So... identity politics is fine, as long as it's your identity?
For some it's a reaction mechanism.
If one side fights dirty and you feel threatened, many people will naturally utilize similar strategies. So yes, frequently it is about fighting against what feels to be everyone getting some form of special treatment, minus whites (particularly males), who insulting seems to cause the least uproar.
I think you should stop classifying things the way you do, there's no concrete definitions used by everyone, particularly when most people aren't articulate enough with their words to know what they are. For me, certainly, at least a portion of why I'm against the left is because the "normal" society is being left behind. That's not to say it's white people, but the ones who have assimilated well into society, or have a long history with the region, etc. Naturally where I live this is mainly white people, but plenty of asians too. So that's one aspect of the fight, and the other one is the neo-feminism movement. First-wave feminism was wonderful, women not wanting to be seen as property, but actually have their rights, it was great... The shit that's going on now, it's gross. Seems like it's catching on a bit, and more and more women are slowly not associating themselves with those nutjobs.
For me, the biggest thing by far is not to do with race, sex, or any other of those attributes. My reason for being a Trump supporter first and foremost is not for economic reasons, but for social reasons. I think that shared cultural values is the most important thing in a society, and it's been what's lacking a lot. Socialists/social democrats don't like being compared to communists... I guess my vision does have slight fascist undertones, but nowhere to the same level, so often its blown out of proportion.
But anyway, don't try to classify the alt-right in the current way you do. There's many people who think they are being screwed over and forgotten, they don't classify their feelings into these things, they don't know exactly what they want... They just want to stop the preferential treatment of all the vocal minorities. For me as someone I guess that had thoughts on a similar page to the alt-right for 5+ years, but not knowing who they were until like 2 months ago (even now, getting way more attention that it's worthy of imo)... The slogan that stuck with me more than any is "the silent majority is back".
The "First they came..." poem is quite representative of how people are feeling imo.
Look, this push is inevitable, going for more equality in society and all that, but I think there wasn't enough representation on the other side. There's always this corruption when one party is calling the shots. Look at the women's studies courses, where the goal is to be 50-50, but all of the sudden they're trying to take more than what is fair, and it starts going the other way. So if you want fairness, you can't have woman's studies grads fighting for equality without an equal force on the other side fighting for men, because it starts to be a one-way bargain, it's how and why we rise up.
Mind you, there are other reasons for supporting Trump over Hillary, but honestly, I probably wouldn't need any others. Nowadays, when I read the arguments here for the anti-Trump side, I'm glad he received the vote of some of my family and friends. Much of the "intelligent right" sees the advantages, and how they must combat the left movement, they see that sometimes they pull these somewhat dirty tricks... The left on the other hand, people like Plansix, oh man. They'll play the innocent card to their graves even though from my viewpoint they are 100x more manipulative than the right. This is more a reference to the arguments I see on the forums, I don't have much time to discuss the left in real life.
edit: Like that one guy who was shouting about why the left lost before his TV show started... Effective communication is key. Neo-feminists (feminazis) will only discuss with women to affirm their positions, white men might bitch about the world only to each other. If you want genuine progress, which I'd welcome, but nobody is acting like they want it... Then you must get all stakeholders to have a say in what happens. It's extremely difficult to do, but in the current political climate, it's all take take take, until the other side notices, take back take back, vilify the other side, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
