Xipe Totec
Something nasty in the woodshed
For once I agree with you, at least in part.
We really need a metric fücktonne more Luigis.
Fake news
- Thread starter multitool
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
For once I agree with you, at least in part.
We really need a metric fücktonne more Luigis.
Re: Fake News
An aspect find particularly disappointing/depressing/disheartening is how so many (at least in the west) are so prepared to accept their "news" from sources with clearly identified vested interests and then readily believe highly questionable without question.
I can't understand how humanity can ever address the challenges it faces when its "solutions" are based on significantly flawed data/assumptions. To me really does suggest as a society we have not great long term prospects. My only hope is that it's a short term "glitch" whilst we get to understand how to cope with new technologies (but I'm not hopeful).
Ian
An aspect find particularly disappointing/depressing/disheartening is how so many (at least in the west) are so prepared to accept their "news" from sources with clearly identified vested interests and then readily believe highly questionable without question.
I can't understand how humanity can ever address the challenges it faces when its "solutions" are based on significantly flawed data/assumptions. To me really does suggest as a society we have not great long term prospects. My only hope is that it's a short term "glitch" whilst we get to understand how to cope with new technologies (but I'm not hopeful).
Ian
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Whilst I agree with you on questioning the partiality of “mainstream” media, personally, I am equally sceptical about some video shot on a mobile phone, and, supported by various claims, from some anonymous source.
AndyRM
Elder Goth
You should probably be more sceptical about the latter, though the former does itself no favours sometimes.
Maybe a bit off-topic but I completely disregard TV Vox populi/MOTS/Vox pop on the TV news. So many shortcomings but eg
- What is "news" about asking some random person on the street?
- Depending on the channel the people selected are not "random" eg BBC's need for balance means they'll select eg 2 pro-something and 2-anti-something.
- How can asking eg 3 people give any idea about popular opinion. Even the commercial polling companies face massive challenges and at least they give error margins and on much larger samples.
- I regard them as intended of no more than "entertainment" eg they hold similar view to me reassures me whereas they hold different views from me and I despair about the UK population.
What I do find interesting is when TV interview experts eg Human Rights Lawyers with a long established track record or former advisers to some country leader who knows details and processes.
That said I find two way discussing issues with others helpfulwhen it's 2-way eg of forums like this. Useful really when posters providereasons for their views with links to sources for data when appropriate. Helps one form one's own views, appreciate why others hold different views and completely different process than the one way TV vox pop.
Ian
Wasn't there a bit of an outcry about such footage that went "viral" on social media. I didn't pay that much attention but it was on mainstream news. Where somebody recorded video of Police Officers really "laying into" some poor innocent" in a UK airport. Big outcry against the Police for such needless violence ... until a few days later when the airport released their CCTV recordings that included the entire incident and told a very different story and suddenly all those tick-tock "influencers" went very quiet (wiping the egg off their faces).
Maybe it highlights your point about mobile phone footage. Can be useful but needs questioning and alternative secondary sources.
Ian
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Wouldn't disagree with any of that.
Unfortunately, provision of links is not universal or consistent.
Public Opinion is, IMHO, an extremely difficult thing to determine, I find that, most of the time, I know approximately what is going on in my head, but, I am constantly surprised by what appears to be going on in the head of other people who I come in contact with, and, my failure to be able to predict it. 🙂
ebikeerwidnes
Senior Member
As a wise man once said
A lie can get round the World before the Truth has got its boots on
also phrased as
"The xxx are out to kill you"
Now - lets sit down and I will explain - using this PowerPoint and a few educational props - why this is untrue
(I said the last bit - so said by a less wise man)
anyway - as Brexit showed a Three Word Slogan (four at a push) will rile up the masses while a carefully explain strategy plays to a hall with 6 people and a dog - and 3 of those people are wondering when the band starts
A lie can get round the World before the Truth has got its boots on
also phrased as
"The xxx are out to kill you"
Now - lets sit down and I will explain - using this PowerPoint and a few educational props - why this is untrue
(I said the last bit - so said by a less wise man)
anyway - as Brexit showed a Three Word Slogan (four at a push) will rile up the masses while a carefully explain strategy plays to a hall with 6 people and a dog - and 3 of those people are wondering when the band starts
Badger_Boom
Member
I'm a member of a single model car group on Facebook. This morning in a thread about finding cheaper parts made by 'lesser' car makers to keep a premium brand's model on the road, one poster equated looking up part numbers on Google to find a deal, with doing 'research' to prove their belief that climate change is a hoax.
RecordAceFromNew
Regular
A great analysis of the mechanics by which we are hoodwinked can be found here.
They can't, because they might as well be on a different planet.
Fake news are just symptoms, not the disease. The disease unfortunately has roots older than the Crusades - somehow many believe there is only one ideal, that our way is the best way, even for those who are a world away with their own millennia of history.
The elephantine manifestation of this disease is a relatively young sacred cow called liberal democracy - leaders are leaders because they are popular, not because they have proven, relevant merits. Voters don't seem to mind that it doesn't work even for us (because people are a doddle to mislead), that it therefore won't self correct by election cycles as advertised, and that "liberal democracies" have delivered the worst man-made atrocities for decades.
Churchill famously quipped liberal democracy being the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried. Yet the Chinese have been proving quite comprehensively (to those who haven't been brainwashed anyway) that this belief is out-dated, for their circumstance anyway as they make clear. But will we try to glean and see what can be learnt from them? Not a chance - not only do the puppet masters have every incentive to keep the gigs going, the puppets are satisfied, many feeling superior even, because they think they have agency because they have a vote, while running around in circles.
They can't, because they might as well be on a different planet.
Fake news are just symptoms, not the disease. The disease unfortunately has roots older than the Crusades - somehow many believe there is only one ideal, that our way is the best way, even for those who are a world away with their own millennia of history.
The elephantine manifestation of this disease is a relatively young sacred cow called liberal democracy - leaders are leaders because they are popular, not because they have proven, relevant merits. Voters don't seem to mind that it doesn't work even for us (because people are a doddle to mislead), that it therefore won't self correct by election cycles as advertised, and that "liberal democracies" have delivered the worst man-made atrocities for decades.
Churchill famously quipped liberal democracy being the worst form of government, except all the others that have been tried. Yet the Chinese have been proving quite comprehensively (to those who haven't been brainwashed anyway) that this belief is out-dated, for their circumstance anyway as they make clear. But will we try to glean and see what can be learnt from them? Not a chance - not only do the puppet masters have every incentive to keep the gigs going, the puppets are satisfied, many feeling superior even, because they think they have agency because they have a vote, while running around in circles.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
We can certainly learn a lot from the Chinese, and there's definitely the argument that you can only effectively manage a population of that size with an authoritarian government, but their circumstances are unique to them and I wouldn't want to see their methods adopted here. I do think it's interesting that when the government appoint regional heads/managers they apparently mostly select scientists and engineers ie problem solvers, logistics experts, because being untroubled by the requirements of democratic elections they just appoint whoever will get things done efficiently (in line with the Party obvs). I have some new Chinese friends who say things are done more quickly and efficiently in China, whether you like it or not ...
Last edited:
dutchguylivingintheuk
Veteran
Interesngly the title of this topic ''Fake news and is exactly what the Guardian article is. If you reed the article they link to and then look at the sources being used you notice it's fake news the author did everything in this persons power to get to the outcome his ''research'' turn-out to find out. So surprising. I't like researching that bananas are bend or something.
The bigger question that always gets ignored however, is why parties like Trump, Afd, etc. get so many votes, you typical bullshit like ''populism'' is dragged in but that is of course non-sense because if that would be the case why now? the more likely cause is that we starting the see the results of ''wir shaffen das'' yes i understand the typical weak minds will pull up the racism card. But i said before and i will say again having a mass influx of a big group of refugees doesn't have to be a big problem, as long as you manage it.
That's where it went wrong and still goes wrong, those who criticism it are branded ''racist'' resulting in an group dat only seems to grow finding political shelter in the ones like AFD, PVV, Front national, Whatever Farage calls it in the coming years.
Well if done properly before the first wave arrived we would have made clear rules, consequences and ways to monitor this people especially since all ingredients of this going wrong where there from the start, not alone talking about cultural differences but also the fact that Isis threatened with sending terrorist back, a threat they clearly have acted upon. (yes also from home grown terrorist) but that off course also would be called ''racist''
Heard it all before, yet the numbers that now seem to turn to the likes of AFD and such either shows a lot of covert racist or simply shows people don't trust current politics and are done and so want change. Just as we seen happening in America in the past 12 years. Trump isn't a popular figure never was, but he stands for change people so desperately want, i not even think people particularly believe or think trump is the one being able to deliver that change but maybe he outrageous shake up might make it normal again at some point.
The bigger question that always gets ignored however, is why parties like Trump, Afd, etc. get so many votes, you typical bullshit like ''populism'' is dragged in but that is of course non-sense because if that would be the case why now? the more likely cause is that we starting the see the results of ''wir shaffen das'' yes i understand the typical weak minds will pull up the racism card. But i said before and i will say again having a mass influx of a big group of refugees doesn't have to be a big problem, as long as you manage it.
That's where it went wrong and still goes wrong, those who criticism it are branded ''racist'' resulting in an group dat only seems to grow finding political shelter in the ones like AFD, PVV, Front national, Whatever Farage calls it in the coming years.
Well if done properly before the first wave arrived we would have made clear rules, consequences and ways to monitor this people especially since all ingredients of this going wrong where there from the start, not alone talking about cultural differences but also the fact that Isis threatened with sending terrorist back, a threat they clearly have acted upon. (yes also from home grown terrorist) but that off course also would be called ''racist''
Heard it all before, yet the numbers that now seem to turn to the likes of AFD and such either shows a lot of covert racist or simply shows people don't trust current politics and are done and so want change. Just as we seen happening in America in the past 12 years. Trump isn't a popular figure never was, but he stands for change people so desperately want, i not even think people particularly believe or think trump is the one being able to deliver that change but maybe he outrageous shake up might make it normal again at some point.
bobzmyunkle
Über Member
Or both. The first leaves them open to manipulation by the likes of Trump into believing he might bring the change they want.
Plenty of people said when Biden was elected that if he didn't make significant changes Trump would be back on steroids.
Plenty of Biden apologists, since Trump's comeback, saying Biden did improve things, yet large sections of the US population didn't seem to feel that improvement.
Starmer appears to be going down the same path. See @CXRAndy's Reform posts if you have any doubts as to where this is going.
dutchguylivingintheuk
Veteran
Yes Biden was something that represents ''the old ways'' nd after four years of Trump around 18% that voter for him did so because ''he was not Trump''
And they would never had experienced that because Trump is good in two things, making others do the dirty work, and claiming how great and succesfull he is not bothered by the fact it might not be his doing.(or his governments for that matter)
I think the biggest mistake the democrats made is make Biden run again, they should have put someone against Trump who would at least have a fighting chance. But the reason why tht does not happen is the same as to why Starmer is running for Labour, existing parties(including the republicans without trump) or more run like companies boring and neatly within the lines is more valued then painting outside of the lines, on the other hand we see that those who dare to speak outside of the lines are generally rewarded by the electorate doesn't even matter if they say things that or true or make sense or not see Trump. But also Obama no i' not comparing Trump to Obama i'm just saying they both have a atypical approach compared to typical politics.
And i think if the democrats had some balls and had for example put someone like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez against Trump i'm not so sure if he would have won.
But thee are numberous fractions within the democrats who don't want her on that position, and so we got a other four years of Trump, not that i agree with everything Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says but it would have been better then Trump.(like almost everyone would have)
Yes But starmer is within labour also the save choice not the most outspoken choice and that worked against the tories that switched more leaders then a alcoholic drinks on a sunday afternoon, helped by the fact that Rishi didn't really manage to present himself well either, but that's about it i think he would have a hard time against Badenbourgh (just an analysis on their debating technique etc. not political views) and not to mention Farage.
