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.
On September 22 2017 04:50 Danglars wrote: The twitter link was attesting that it's usually the left/liberals that are asking for these kinds of things.
The left complains about it because the right is the main source of fake news and hate groups...
Ahh, you remind me that I forgot to put "and sees all sorts of conservative groups as hate groups and all kinds of inconvenient news as fake news." The false cause for action goes hand in hand with all these authoritarian policies for the fix.
We are talking about stuff like "The pope endorsed Trump"
I know that right wing folks believe in alternate facts, but even then some things are just simply not correct. It takes me 30 seconds to make up random shit:
"Donald Trump and Angela Merkel were dating in the 80s"
If i had any talent, it would then take me maybe 3-4 hours to make a semi-legitimate looking web page that runs this "story" that i totally pulled out of my ass. It then takes me maybe a few more hours to make up other semi-legitimate looking sites that support this story.
If i place this random shit on facebook, it goes viral, i get ad money, and everyone is more stupid. At some point, someone will factcheck that, but because "weird story is not actually true" is boring, no one cares. Half the people who read my initial BS still believe that Trump was dating Merkel.
This is a problem. And right-wing people employ this very liberally, though some left-wing people are also very quick to propagate stuff without even basic factchecking if it fits their world view. The world would be better without this stuff. This can all be prevented by some basic factchecking early on. It just needs a "This is bullshit" stamp before it gets to people who will never hear the counterstory.
Fun fact, i actually just deleted another part of this post because i couldn't actually figure out quickly whether it was true or not. It was about the "fox news makes you less informed" stuff.
Maybe it started out as the story mills for clicks, but increasingly the term has come to mean deceptive news stories and mostly false news stories. Trump tweets about some stories being fake news, people says Trump's tweets are fake news, we have fake news outlets, etc. What you mention about story corrects happens on the other side on twitter. Some lefty journo will tweet out something wrong and get 7k retweets and likes, the correction will number 100-200 only.
See this CNN host's struggles on the topic of credibility from a panel of Trump voters
I haven't seen enough evidence for this having far reach ... like people voted for Trumo because they really thought the pope had endorsed him. I've yet to see a convincing write up showing it's impact beyond those few percent on right and left that are easily deceived ("Ben Shapiro is a white supremacist therefore not fit on Berkeley!!!").
It's all been very overblown. Much of the propulsion behind the fake news about the impact of fake news is closeted attempts to call all Trump voters stupid and ongoing overt attempts to undermine the legitimacy of his election (if people REALLY knew about Trump they wouldn't have voted for him!)
On September 22 2017 05:17 Nevuk wrote: It is fascinating to read comments on right wing sites vs left wing sites on the recent leak of Lawrence ODonnell freaking out on set. (It is pretty funny but no OReilly "do it live". ) It is mostly an embarrassing video of a B/C list liberal celebrity being (possibly understandably) annoyed.
Anyways, huffpost m.huffpost.com has very few comments and they're either " I don't care" or "he apologized so it is OK" while right wing sites are mostly focused on him behaving like a lunatic while questioning Trump's stability and treating this as a big win. Just a site at random, yahoo Canada has mostly conservative reactions ca.news.yahoo.com
I dont think the the original video is actually threadworthy, but these varying reactions are all interesting to me as both sides seem wrong on it. Here it is for context :
I kept waiting for it to happen. How is this a thing?
On September 22 2017 06:26 Danglars wrote: I haven't seen enough evidence for this having far reach ... like people voted for Trumo because they really thought the pope had endorsed him. I've yet to see a convincing write up showing it's impact beyond those few percent on right and left that are easily deceived ("Ben Shapiro is a white supremacist therefore not fit on Berkeley!!!").
It's all been very overblown. Much of the propulsion behind the fake news about the impact of fake news is closeted attempts to call all Trump voters stupid and ongoing overt attempts to undermine the legitimacy of his election (if people REALLY knew about Trump they wouldn't have voted for him!)
You're aware that Trump himself was deceived by the fake Barry Soetoro stories and did a great deal to propagate them, right?
The limited reach of fake news extends to the President himself.
On September 22 2017 05:17 Nevuk wrote: It is fascinating to read comments on right wing sites vs left wing sites on the recent leak of Lawrence ODonnell freaking out on set. (It is pretty funny but no OReilly "do it live". ) It is mostly an embarrassing video of a B/C list liberal celebrity being (possibly understandably) annoyed.
Anyways, huffpost m.huffpost.com has very few comments and they're either " I don't care" or "he apologized so it is OK" while right wing sites are mostly focused on him behaving like a lunatic while questioning Trump's stability and treating this as a big win. Just a site at random, yahoo Canada has mostly conservative reactions ca.news.yahoo.com
I dont think the the original video is actually threadworthy, but these varying reactions are all interesting to me as both sides seem wrong on it. Here it is for context : https://youtube.com/watch?v=kLB1bZ2_VXE
I kept waiting for it to happen. How is this a thing?
Seems like a guy in charge reacting not very tactfully to his subordinates being crazy unprofessional. Probably the most interesting part is watching an anchor's face as he gets ready for the camera.
Trump says Alex Jones is a journalist. I understand people went a little nuts with the fake news thing, but we also had pizza gate which ended in gunfire. Its reach was real.
I love there's this "Bernie should have waited to introduce legislation" thing going around liberal media circles and even Jennifer Palmieri refused to get on board when Chuck Todd asked her on MTP daily.
The hillary interview with Colbert is really.... something. At one point she accuses Putin of inventing Manspreading. (Maybe I misheard? It was really weird. I hope I misheard)
She's gone into full "it was Russia that made me lose" mode since the release of the book. I noticed that throughout it she talks about Putin with all the maturity of an 8-year-old. I suppose it's her form of loser's lament.
On September 22 2017 08:35 LegalLord wrote: She's gone into full "it was Russia that made me lose" mode since the release of the book. I noticed that throughout it she talks about Putin with all the maturity of an 8-year-old. I suppose it's her form of loser's lament.
Was the book as bad with the huffpo review? That sucker was brutal if you read it.
On September 22 2017 08:35 LegalLord wrote: She's gone into full "it was Russia that made me lose" mode since the release of the book. I noticed that throughout it she talks about Putin with all the maturity of an 8-year-old. I suppose it's her form of loser's lament.
Was the book as bad with the huffpo review? That sucker was brutal if you read it.
I wrote a whole review on it in my blog if you want to know what I thought.
I...can't really fault him for this. What a glorious rebuke.
I also learned about the word 'dotard', how is that not a common insult in the dota community yet lol
'But far from making remarks of any persuasive power that can be viewed to be helpful to defusing tension, he made unprecedented rude nonsense one has never heard from any of his predecessors'
'he is unfit to hold the prerogative of supreme command of a country and he is surely a rogue and a gangster fond of playing with fire, rather than a politician'
I guess the bad news is tensions will only get higher though :X but at least WW3 goes down in style.
Maybe we should give Jong-Un a twitter account and have the countries leaders fight in 140 word rap battles instead of nukes.
I can't be the only one a little bit concerned about the "path I chose is correct and that it is the one I have to follow to the last" bit. While I appreciate anytime a foreign leader calls out Trump's ridiculousness, this has some scarier undertones to it.
On September 22 2017 10:16 NewSunshine wrote: I can't be the only one a little bit concerned about the "path I chose is correct and that it is the one I have to follow to the last" bit. While I appreciate anytime a foreign leader calls out Trump's ridiculousness, this has some scarier undertones to it.
Over time it's become increasingly clear that he is pushing for nukes in a very systematic, calculated way. That's not really anything new. It's always been a sort of cult-like reality over there.
EPT
