Topic: HEY: squeegee thread. it's not about politics.
squeegee started this discussion 9 years ago #57,339
okay, fine, it's about politics. well, fake news. well, actually this thread is about reaching out to conservative/liberal family and trying to, uh, heal wounds. so maybe this election was kinda divisive, but it's time to try and find common ground.
i'm looking for ways to reach out. it's hard though, because i'm frequently met with condescension. it's getting better, but having my opinions dismissed because, "he's a liberal," and that kinda thing will never stop. i've gotten used to that, what i want to do is try and stop the outright disagreement over easily verifiable facts. the whole "fake news" thing is causing more fights than anything. my parents gave up traditional media a couple of years ago and now get all their news from "the internet." and i do too. and i think this is the crux of the problem.
for years i was told, "don't believe everything you see on TV," but it seems that same scrutiny doesn't cross over to the internet. and i know i've been guilty of it too, i've read and believed things that turned out to be false, but my parents are just as, if not more than guilty of this than me. we disagree on the stupidest shit and prove each other wrong over and over and over and i'm getting really tired of fighting imaginary enemies and defending against baseless attacks. at least within my own family.
i'm not entirely sure how to... have the same world view. it may be impossible now, but i think maybe we can get back to a point of agreeing on reality, and just merely disagreeing on how to deal with it.
so i'm going to subscribe to two print newspapers. one liberal paper and the other conservative, to at least *try* and expose myself to a counterpoint based in objective fact. and i'm hoping that my folks will let me do the same for them for Christmas and gift them subscriptions to traditional media they can use. maybe this way we'll at least have some basis for actual discussion.
i'm thinking the Dallas Morning News since it's liberal and local, and the Washington Times as a conservative pick. if we have some kind of foundation to work from, then maybe we can fix the rhetoric within our own family at least.
thoughts?
opinions on the Washington Times as a conservative paper? i don't read or know conservative media, so if anyone knows of a more reputable conservative paper then i'm all ears. i really want to try and make nice with my family and at the same time try and show a willingness to be open to their perspective.
i'm looking for ways to reach out. it's hard though, because i'm frequently met with condescension. it's getting better, but having my opinions dismissed because, "he's a liberal," and that kinda thing will never stop. i've gotten used to that, what i want to do is try and stop the outright disagreement over easily verifiable facts. the whole "fake news" thing is causing more fights than anything. my parents gave up traditional media a couple of years ago and now get all their news from "the internet." and i do too. and i think this is the crux of the problem.
for years i was told, "don't believe everything you see on TV," but it seems that same scrutiny doesn't cross over to the internet. and i know i've been guilty of it too, i've read and believed things that turned out to be false, but my parents are just as, if not more than guilty of this than me. we disagree on the stupidest shit and prove each other wrong over and over and over and i'm getting really tired of fighting imaginary enemies and defending against baseless attacks. at least within my own family.
i'm not entirely sure how to... have the same world view. it may be impossible now, but i think maybe we can get back to a point of agreeing on reality, and just merely disagreeing on how to deal with it.
so i'm going to subscribe to two print newspapers. one liberal paper and the other conservative, to at least *try* and expose myself to a counterpoint based in objective fact. and i'm hoping that my folks will let me do the same for them for Christmas and gift them subscriptions to traditional media they can use. maybe this way we'll at least have some basis for actual discussion.
i'm thinking the Dallas Morning News since it's liberal and local, and the Washington Times as a conservative pick. if we have some kind of foundation to work from, then maybe we can fix the rhetoric within our own family at least.
thoughts?
opinions on the Washington Times as a conservative paper? i don't read or know conservative media, so if anyone knows of a more reputable conservative paper then i'm all ears. i really want to try and make nice with my family and at the same time try and show a willingness to be open to their perspective.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #737,080
Washington Times is run by a crazy religious south korean church and has an interesting history http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/the_washington_times_takes_a_b.php
For not crazy right wing views I'd recommend The Economist, WSJ or National Review. The problem is there are so many more nutso print right wing sources that it's really slim pickings.
For not crazy right wing views I'd recommend The Economist, WSJ or National Review. The problem is there are so many more nutso print right wing sources that it's really slim pickings.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU double-posted this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #737,082
Also it goes without saying that you should check out Fox News once in a while to see what the right wing is thinking.
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #737,083
Is "fake news" really that big of a problem? To me it feels like the media trying to rationalize how badly the polling was off this election. "We would have called it right if it weren't for that danged fake news!!
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 9 years ago, 15 minutes later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #737,084
@previous (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
I've never seen a news agency attribute fake news as the primary reason why polls were off, but there are news sites run by foreigners that get a lot of hits by blatantly making shit up for ad revenue, which is not so good for the overall political discourse.
I've never seen a news agency attribute fake news as the primary reason why polls were off, but there are news sites run by foreigners that get a lot of hits by blatantly making shit up for ad revenue, which is not so good for the overall political discourse.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 8 minutes later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #737,085
@737,083 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
> Is "fake news" really that big of a problem? To me it feels like the media trying to rationalize how badly the polling was off this election. "We would have called it right if it weren't for that danged fake news!!
This. Also, what age range are you in squeegee? And your parents? I'm age 21-30, my parents 41-50.
> Is "fake news" really that big of a problem? To me it feels like the media trying to rationalize how badly the polling was off this election. "We would have called it right if it weren't for that danged fake news!!
This. Also, what age range are you in squeegee? And your parents? I'm age 21-30, my parents 41-50.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 32 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #737,094
@737,080 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
thanks, i'll look at these. i don't really know the right wing very well.
@737,082 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
uh, yeah... i have been. it's... not fun for me. whenever something big happens i check out fox and cnn to get different view points. the election was... interesting. they were worlds apart in opinion.
@737,083 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
in my family it is i guess. through the election it was like we lived in two different realities, and i was constantly having to debunk their news. it was infuriating, because they'd hardly even admit i was right and then slam me with 2 more fake news stories. it was like battling an avalanche. i was calling out the "fake news" but calling it propaganda way back. eventually i had to concede the propaganda was coming from both sides to get them to even admit there was propaganda at all. finally we've been able to have conversations about it, but they still cling to a bunch of conspiracy theories and push fake news.
yesterday i overheard her blaming the fake news stuff on George Soros. they're pretty deep into the rabbit hole. i'm not sure i can lead them back to traditional media.
thanks, i'll look at these. i don't really know the right wing very well.
@737,082 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
uh, yeah... i have been. it's... not fun for me. whenever something big happens i check out fox and cnn to get different view points. the election was... interesting. they were worlds apart in opinion.
@737,083 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
in my family it is i guess. through the election it was like we lived in two different realities, and i was constantly having to debunk their news. it was infuriating, because they'd hardly even admit i was right and then slam me with 2 more fake news stories. it was like battling an avalanche. i was calling out the "fake news" but calling it propaganda way back. eventually i had to concede the propaganda was coming from both sides to get them to even admit there was propaganda at all. finally we've been able to have conversations about it, but they still cling to a bunch of conspiracy theories and push fake news.
yesterday i overheard her blaming the fake news stuff on George Soros. they're pretty deep into the rabbit hole. i'm not sure i can lead them back to traditional media.
squeegee (OP) double-posted this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #737,098
@737,085 (D)
bout the same age as you probably. parents are 10 years older than yours though. i'm one of the youngest of 6 kids. but with the amount of time tripping i've done i'm not sure exactly how old i am. i spent 3 years in the 60s trying to stop the JFK assassination and then another 3 years going back and doing it myself (big mistake).
bout the same age as you probably. parents are 10 years older than yours though. i'm one of the youngest of 6 kids. but with the amount of time tripping i've done i'm not sure exactly how old i am. i spent 3 years in the 60s trying to stop the JFK assassination and then another 3 years going back and doing it myself (big mistake).
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #737,100
@737,084 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Well they're not saying it in those words specifically but I do get the feeling they're implying it. Why else would it be a big deal suddenly right after the election?
Also are the people who read RealAmericanNews.biz.ru and believe the stories about "Obama To extend voting rights to Kenyans" really going to see the error of their ways when CNN tells them to be wary of "fake news"?
Well they're not saying it in those words specifically but I do get the feeling they're implying it. Why else would it be a big deal suddenly right after the election?
Also are the people who read RealAmericanNews.biz.ru and believe the stories about "Obama To extend voting rights to Kenyans" really going to see the error of their ways when CNN tells them to be wary of "fake news"?
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #737,104
@previous (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
oh, it was the russian spamming of propaganda that created a flood. i'll try and find the article, i think i have it book marked, but i read an interesting article on russia's propaganda machine, how it works, why it works, and how it's happening here, in the EU, and elsewhere.
but the reason it's an issue now is because the sheer volume of it is new and arguably more disruptive than it was previously. the conversation needs to be had, because it's likely social media was complicit and problems need to be admitted and addressed. this isn't a partisan issue, and we need to get over that.
propaganda is everyone's problem.
oh, it was the russian spamming of propaganda that created a flood. i'll try and find the article, i think i have it book marked, but i read an interesting article on russia's propaganda machine, how it works, why it works, and how it's happening here, in the EU, and elsewhere.
but the reason it's an issue now is because the sheer volume of it is new and arguably more disruptive than it was previously. the conversation needs to be had, because it's likely social media was complicit and problems need to be admitted and addressed. this isn't a partisan issue, and we need to get over that.
propaganda is everyone's problem.
squeegee (OP) double-posted this 9 years ago, 39 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,125
okay. fuck. i found the article, but i did further reading on one of the guys mentioned and went into a rabbit hole. also, it's a highly inflammatory read from think progress. it's heavily biased, and there are plenty of passages that'll turn off conservative readers well before the article gets to the meat. but, take the article for the facts rather than the editorializing and sensationalism.
this article led me to read a bit about Vladislav Surkov, a russian politician and one of putins advisers. so, the dude does exist, that's not fake, and there's a lot to read about his involvement in propaganda for russia that comes from other places than think progress. he's got a whoooole ideology, or theory about how propaganda can be used to manage democracies, so they have the appearance of a democracy without actually being one. that particular state of affairs is basically how the west views the russians, too, they hold meaningless elections and keep the same autocrats in power and keep their population suppressed with disinformation and fear.
https://thinkprogress.org/when-everything-is-a-lie-power-is-the-only-truth-1e641751d150#.9vlkamqzn
what it sounds like they did was aim that propaganda at our election, and that they have done this before, notably during the brexit. there's also speculation that they'll do it again next year during German elections, but i only read that one place and is speculation which doesn't mean much. but, at face value, it is happening, it's having an unknown impact, and the scale at which the propaganda is spreading is new and larger than before.
so, read the think progress piece if you can stomach the liberal bias and sensationalism, and read more about the guy if you think there's any reason to think this could potentially be a problem going forward. we can certainly disagree on the magnitude of the problem and what should/could be done about it, but i hope there's some kind of common ground to be had in the reality of the situation; it's happening, there's been an impact.
this article led me to read a bit about Vladislav Surkov, a russian politician and one of putins advisers. so, the dude does exist, that's not fake, and there's a lot to read about his involvement in propaganda for russia that comes from other places than think progress. he's got a whoooole ideology, or theory about how propaganda can be used to manage democracies, so they have the appearance of a democracy without actually being one. that particular state of affairs is basically how the west views the russians, too, they hold meaningless elections and keep the same autocrats in power and keep their population suppressed with disinformation and fear.
https://thinkprogress.org/when-everything-is-a-lie-power-is-the-only-truth-1e641751d150#.9vlkamqzn
what it sounds like they did was aim that propaganda at our election, and that they have done this before, notably during the brexit. there's also speculation that they'll do it again next year during German elections, but i only read that one place and is speculation which doesn't mean much. but, at face value, it is happening, it's having an unknown impact, and the scale at which the propaganda is spreading is new and larger than before.
so, read the think progress piece if you can stomach the liberal bias and sensationalism, and read more about the guy if you think there's any reason to think this could potentially be a problem going forward. we can certainly disagree on the magnitude of the problem and what should/could be done about it, but i hope there's some kind of common ground to be had in the reality of the situation; it's happening, there's been an impact.
(Edited 48 seconds later.)
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 26 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,155
@737,094 (squeegee)
> in my family it is i guess. through the election it was like we lived in two different realities, and i was constantly having to debunk their news.
This seems like the way politics has always been.
> it was infuriating, because they'd hardly even admit i was right and then slam me with 2 more fake news stories. it was like battling an avalanche. i was calling out the "fake news" but calling it propaganda way back. eventually i had to concede the propaganda was coming from both sides to get them to even admit there was propaganda at all.
Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
There's like a certain Postmodern aspect to all of this. In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
> in my family it is i guess. through the election it was like we lived in two different realities, and i was constantly having to debunk their news.
This seems like the way politics has always been.
> it was infuriating, because they'd hardly even admit i was right and then slam me with 2 more fake news stories. it was like battling an avalanche. i was calling out the "fake news" but calling it propaganda way back. eventually i had to concede the propaganda was coming from both sides to get them to even admit there was propaganda at all.
Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
There's like a certain Postmodern aspect to all of this. In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg double-posted this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,161
@737,104 (squeegee)
> oh, it was the russian spamming of propaganda that created a flood. i'll try and find the article, i think i have it book marked, but i read an interesting article on russia's propaganda machine, how it works, why it works, and how it's happening here, in the EU, and elsewhere.
>
> but the reason it's an issue now is because the sheer volume of it is new and arguably more disruptive than it was previously. the conversation needs to be had, because it's likely social media was complicit and problems need to be admitted and addressed. this isn't a partisan issue, and we need to get over that.
>
> propaganda is everyone's problem.
What's the endgame though? ABCNNBCBS can tell people to be wary of "fake news" and they can deploy a legion of Politifact™ fact checkers to dispel wrong information but it's preaching to the choir since the people who take ABCNNBCCBS seriously weren't going to be led astray by fake news in the first place. The fake news victims don't pay any attention to the mainstream media anyway.
It would be like Richard Dawkins writing a book about why religion is dumb. The only people who are going to read it are people who already think religion is dumb.
> oh, it was the russian spamming of propaganda that created a flood. i'll try and find the article, i think i have it book marked, but i read an interesting article on russia's propaganda machine, how it works, why it works, and how it's happening here, in the EU, and elsewhere.
>
> but the reason it's an issue now is because the sheer volume of it is new and arguably more disruptive than it was previously. the conversation needs to be had, because it's likely social media was complicit and problems need to be admitted and addressed. this isn't a partisan issue, and we need to get over that.
>
> propaganda is everyone's problem.
What's the endgame though? ABCNNBCBS can tell people to be wary of "fake news" and they can deploy a legion of Politifact™ fact checkers to dispel wrong information but it's preaching to the choir since the people who take ABCNNBCCBS seriously weren't going to be led astray by fake news in the first place. The fake news victims don't pay any attention to the mainstream media anyway.
It would be like Richard Dawkins writing a book about why religion is dumb. The only people who are going to read it are people who already think religion is dumb.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,170
@737,155 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
> In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
and that's a problem. he can't be all those things. he's not all those things.
> Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
but it's build fundamentally on deceit! it's unethical, regardless if one side benefits from it. and it's erosive to a democracy. democracy depends on at least having a fundamental agreement over what the problems are. we can disagree how to handle them, but there needs to be consensus about what the problems are. there can't be compromise unless we can agree on what it is we need to compromise on. the truth matters. facts matter.
> This seems like the way politics has always been.
but it's not. "in the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you had Republicans supporting the Clean Air Act and you had a market-based fix for acid rain rather than a command-and-control approach. So you’d argue about means, but there was a baseline of facts that we could all work off of. And now we just don’t have that." from the think progress piece, which addresses exactly what you're saying.
there is an unwillingness to compromise that runs SO DEEP that now we can't even agree on what's objectively true. this isn't just a problem for politicians, this is a problem for every citizen.
> In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
and that's a problem. he can't be all those things. he's not all those things.
> Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
but it's build fundamentally on deceit! it's unethical, regardless if one side benefits from it. and it's erosive to a democracy. democracy depends on at least having a fundamental agreement over what the problems are. we can disagree how to handle them, but there needs to be consensus about what the problems are. there can't be compromise unless we can agree on what it is we need to compromise on. the truth matters. facts matter.
> This seems like the way politics has always been.
but it's not. "in the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you had Republicans supporting the Clean Air Act and you had a market-based fix for acid rain rather than a command-and-control approach. So you’d argue about means, but there was a baseline of facts that we could all work off of. And now we just don’t have that." from the think progress piece, which addresses exactly what you're saying.
there is an unwillingness to compromise that runs SO DEEP that now we can't even agree on what's objectively true. this isn't just a problem for politicians, this is a problem for every citizen.
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,175
@737,084 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> I've never seen a news agency attribute fake news as the primary reason why polls were off, but there are news sites run by foreigners that get a lot of hits by blatantly making shit up for ad revenue, which is not so good for the overall political discourse.
The ad revenue incentive has always existed though. Why wasn't "fake news" such a problem in 2008 or 2012?
Again what is the endgame? I get the feeling (and again no one in the media has stated it in these words) that the MSM would like some sort of official seal of approval for which media outlets provide "real news".
> I've never seen a news agency attribute fake news as the primary reason why polls were off, but there are news sites run by foreigners that get a lot of hits by blatantly making shit up for ad revenue, which is not so good for the overall political discourse.
The ad revenue incentive has always existed though. Why wasn't "fake news" such a problem in 2008 or 2012?
Again what is the endgame? I get the feeling (and again no one in the media has stated it in these words) that the MSM would like some sort of official seal of approval for which media outlets provide "real news".
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,176
@737,161 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
maybe in hopes that it starts a productive national dialog in intimate settings, like this one. idk. i'm reaching out to friends and family. trying to find this common ground straddling 2 different worlds. at least at this point most people see there's 2 different worlds. i'm appealing to people where i can.
maybe in hopes that it starts a productive national dialog in intimate settings, like this one. idk. i'm reaching out to friends and family. trying to find this common ground straddling 2 different worlds. at least at this point most people see there's 2 different worlds. i'm appealing to people where i can.
buu joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 57 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,177
@737,170 (squeegee)
> > In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
>
> and that's a problem. he can't be all those things. he's not all those things.
>
> >Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
> but it's build fundamentally on deceit! it's unethical, regardless if one side benefits from it. and it's erosive to a democracy. democracy depends on at least having a fundamental agreement over what the problems are. we can disagree how to handle them, but there needs to be consensus about what the problems are. there can't be compromise unless we can agree on what it is we need to compromise on. the truth matters. facts matter.
>
> >This seems like the way politics has always been.
> but it's not. "in the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you had Republicans supporting the Clean Air Act and you had a market-based fix for acid rain rather than a command-and-control approach. So you’d argue about means, but there was a baseline of facts that we could all work off of. And now we just don’t have that." from the think progress piece, which addresses exactly what you're saying.
>
> there is an unwillingness to compromise that runs SO DEEP that now we can't even agree on what's objectively true. this isn't just a problem for politicians, this is a problem for every citizen.
pick your reality! it's part of being an INDIVIDUAL it's so important! who needs facts when you have an opinion
> > In my world, Donald Trump is a centrist Republican who is good at pushing people's buttons. In other peoples' worlds, he's like half Hitler, half David Duke, half Pinochet.
>
> and that's a problem. he can't be all those things. he's not all those things.
>
> >Good tactic. If you say "I'm right and you're wrong" it tends to shut down dialogue.
> but it's build fundamentally on deceit! it's unethical, regardless if one side benefits from it. and it's erosive to a democracy. democracy depends on at least having a fundamental agreement over what the problems are. we can disagree how to handle them, but there needs to be consensus about what the problems are. there can't be compromise unless we can agree on what it is we need to compromise on. the truth matters. facts matter.
>
> >This seems like the way politics has always been.
> but it's not. "in the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you had Republicans supporting the Clean Air Act and you had a market-based fix for acid rain rather than a command-and-control approach. So you’d argue about means, but there was a baseline of facts that we could all work off of. And now we just don’t have that." from the think progress piece, which addresses exactly what you're saying.
>
> there is an unwillingness to compromise that runs SO DEEP that now we can't even agree on what's objectively true. this isn't just a problem for politicians, this is a problem for every citizen.
pick your reality! it's part of being an INDIVIDUAL it's so important! who needs facts when you have an opinion
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,180
@737,175 (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
why are you assuming there's an end game? look, if something happens, a satellite falls out of the sky, they report it. what's their end game? dude. they report the news. russian propaganda flooding social media and overtaking traditional american news is NEWS in and of itself. okay? there's your end game. it's fucking the news. it's their fucking duty to report about it.
and it wasn't a problem previously because it wasn't being done to this scale. stop treating traditional media outlets as some kind of giant liberal cabal! be specific, stop using MSM as a catch all for whatever conspiracy you want to flaunt! facts matter!
and you're assuming that it's never been spoken about previously, and it has! but the scale and effectiveness are unusually good recently.
why are you assuming there's an end game? look, if something happens, a satellite falls out of the sky, they report it. what's their end game? dude. they report the news. russian propaganda flooding social media and overtaking traditional american news is NEWS in and of itself. okay? there's your end game. it's fucking the news. it's their fucking duty to report about it.
and it wasn't a problem previously because it wasn't being done to this scale. stop treating traditional media outlets as some kind of giant liberal cabal! be specific, stop using MSM as a catch all for whatever conspiracy you want to flaunt! facts matter!
and you're assuming that it's never been spoken about previously, and it has! but the scale and effectiveness are unusually good recently.
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
squeegee (OP) double-posted this 9 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,183
i have a feeling i just made this thread entirely unproductive.buu replied with this 9 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,185
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,189
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,193
@previous (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
yes, but i won't make concessions on points of fact. but i'm perfectly willing to hear arguments up to and including that it doesn't matter. personally i feel that it's a threat to our election process, and that during times of elections especially we as a country, including our media and social media, need to scrutinize the news much better, and work to clearly label what are Op-Ed Opinion pieces, fact based journalism, opinion blogs, and sponsored content.
and i'm not changing the world here, i realize, but something CAN be done to help people sort out for themselves what is news worthy and worth their utmost attention.
without stamping things real and fake news and giving an information monopoly to george soros.
yes, but i won't make concessions on points of fact. but i'm perfectly willing to hear arguments up to and including that it doesn't matter. personally i feel that it's a threat to our election process, and that during times of elections especially we as a country, including our media and social media, need to scrutinize the news much better, and work to clearly label what are Op-Ed Opinion pieces, fact based journalism, opinion blogs, and sponsored content.
and i'm not changing the world here, i realize, but something CAN be done to help people sort out for themselves what is news worthy and worth their utmost attention.
without stamping things real and fake news and giving an information monopoly to george soros.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,212
@previous (squeegee)
How do you tell what is real and fake news? Like say I was an alien from Alpha Centauri who just landed on Earth: how would I know that CNN is real news and InfoWars is fake news?
How do you tell what is real and fake news? Like say I was an alien from Alpha Centauri who just landed on Earth: how would I know that CNN is real news and InfoWars is fake news?
(Edited 38 seconds later.)
squeegee (OP) replied with this 9 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,216
@previous (Metæ !goTRUMPlbg)
rigorous standards of evidence, multiple primary sources, independent verification. infowars lacks all 3. cnn does not. fox news has them too. they just bias right with their editorializing.
rigorous standards of evidence, multiple primary sources, independent verification. infowars lacks all 3. cnn does not. fox news has them too. they just bias right with their editorializing.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Wildchild !GjXpatdBd. joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,217
@OP
> okay, fine, it's about politics. well, fake news. well, actually this thread is about reaching out to conservative/liberal family and trying to, uh, heal wounds. so maybe this election was kinda divisive, but it's time to try and find common ground.
>
> i'm looking for ways to reach out. it's hard though, because i'm frequently met with condescension. it's getting better, but having my opinions dismissed because, "he's a liberal," and that kinda thing will never stop. i've gotten used to that, what i want to do is try and stop the outright disagreement over easily verifiable facts. the whole "fake news" thing is causing more fights than anything. my parents gave up traditional media a couple of years ago and now get all their news from "the internet." and i do too. and i think this is the crux of the problem.
>
> for years i was told, "don't believe everything you see on TV," but it seems that same scrutiny doesn't cross over to the internet. and i know i've been guilty of it too, i've read and believed things that turned out to be false, but my parents are just as, if not more than guilty of this than me. we disagree on the stupidest shit and prove each other wrong over and over and over and i'm getting really tired of fighting imaginary enemies and defending against baseless attacks. at least within my own family.
>
> i'm not entirely sure how to... have the same world view. it may be impossible now, but i think maybe we can get back to a point of agreeing on reality, and just merely disagreeing on how to deal with it.
>
> so i'm going to subscribe to two print newspapers. one liberal paper and the other conservative, to at least *try* and expose myself to a counterpoint based in objective fact. and i'm hoping that my folks will let me do the same for them for Christmas and gift them subscriptions to traditional media they can use. maybe this way we'll at least have some basis for actual discussion.
>
> i'm thinking the Dallas Morning News since it's liberal and local, and the Washington Times as a conservative pick. if we have some kind of foundation to work from, then maybe we can fix the rhetoric within our own family at least.
>
> thoughts?
>
> opinions on the Washington Times as a conservative paper? i don't read or know conservative media, so if anyone knows of a more reputable conservative paper then i'm all ears. i really want to try and make nice with my family and at the same time try and show a willingness to be open to their perspective.
All news sources are biased, but I have always have found that PBS or NPR seems to have some of the highest quality content in terms of News. It's by far not conservative and has been accused of having a liberal bias, but I have never seen it, but it is one of the ones which are more likely to be neutral or share both sides in issues.
> okay, fine, it's about politics. well, fake news. well, actually this thread is about reaching out to conservative/liberal family and trying to, uh, heal wounds. so maybe this election was kinda divisive, but it's time to try and find common ground.
>
> i'm looking for ways to reach out. it's hard though, because i'm frequently met with condescension. it's getting better, but having my opinions dismissed because, "he's a liberal," and that kinda thing will never stop. i've gotten used to that, what i want to do is try and stop the outright disagreement over easily verifiable facts. the whole "fake news" thing is causing more fights than anything. my parents gave up traditional media a couple of years ago and now get all their news from "the internet." and i do too. and i think this is the crux of the problem.
>
> for years i was told, "don't believe everything you see on TV," but it seems that same scrutiny doesn't cross over to the internet. and i know i've been guilty of it too, i've read and believed things that turned out to be false, but my parents are just as, if not more than guilty of this than me. we disagree on the stupidest shit and prove each other wrong over and over and over and i'm getting really tired of fighting imaginary enemies and defending against baseless attacks. at least within my own family.
>
> i'm not entirely sure how to... have the same world view. it may be impossible now, but i think maybe we can get back to a point of agreeing on reality, and just merely disagreeing on how to deal with it.
>
> so i'm going to subscribe to two print newspapers. one liberal paper and the other conservative, to at least *try* and expose myself to a counterpoint based in objective fact. and i'm hoping that my folks will let me do the same for them for Christmas and gift them subscriptions to traditional media they can use. maybe this way we'll at least have some basis for actual discussion.
>
> i'm thinking the Dallas Morning News since it's liberal and local, and the Washington Times as a conservative pick. if we have some kind of foundation to work from, then maybe we can fix the rhetoric within our own family at least.
>
> thoughts?
>
> opinions on the Washington Times as a conservative paper? i don't read or know conservative media, so if anyone knows of a more reputable conservative paper then i'm all ears. i really want to try and make nice with my family and at the same time try and show a willingness to be open to their perspective.
All news sources are biased, but I have always have found that PBS or NPR seems to have some of the highest quality content in terms of News. It's by far not conservative and has been accused of having a liberal bias, but I have never seen it, but it is one of the ones which are more likely to be neutral or share both sides in issues.
Killer Lettuce? !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 9 years ago, 33 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,220
I remember, back when this fake news thing was being brought up, I went to /pol/ as I was curious how the far-right was reacting to the situation. Of course, they were all up in arms about how it was a conspiracy to suppress right-wing sources. It seemed like they all agreed that's what was going on. They didn't see any merit to these claims....But just a few weeks before, I had seen /pol/ organising a false-flag operation where they were going to impersonate Hillary voters, and contact undecided voters with exaggerated and made-up statements, so they'd be put off voting for Hillary. When I remembered that, I just thought "what a bunch of cunts".
> if anyone knows of a more reputable conservative paper then i'm all ears.
The Telegraph. They are slaves to the Conservative Party, but they're still quite classy. Them being British should be a natural counterbalance to the slightly nuttier American right-wing sources.
(Edited 41 seconds later.)
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg replied with this 9 years ago, 19 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #737,221
@737,216 (squeegee)
InfoWars has all that. Alex Jones can get multiple people to testify to the lizardmen running the government through Knights Templar shell companies and front groups.
InfoWars has all that. Alex Jones can get multiple people to testify to the lizardmen running the government through Knights Templar shell companies and front groups.
Metæ !goTRUMPlbg double-posted this 9 years ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #737,523
@737,193 (squeegee)
> and i'm not changing the world here, i realize, but something CAN be done to help people sort out for themselves what is news worthy and worth their utmost attention.
What can be done though? Again the guy who believes the "Obama bans Pledge of Allegiance" story on Facebook isn't going to go through like a six step logical process to figure out if it's real or fake. The people who are worried about it aren't likely to be fooled anyway.
> without stamping things real and fake news and giving an information monopoly to george soros.
That's exactly where this is leading. I read it on RealPatriotNews.blogspot.ru
> and i'm not changing the world here, i realize, but something CAN be done to help people sort out for themselves what is news worthy and worth their utmost attention.
What can be done though? Again the guy who believes the "Obama bans Pledge of Allegiance" story on Facebook isn't going to go through like a six step logical process to figure out if it's real or fake. The people who are worried about it aren't likely to be fooled anyway.
> without stamping things real and fake news and giving an information monopoly to george soros.
That's exactly where this is leading. I read it on RealPatriotNews.blogspot.ru