4 ms·

>many people, seeing only stereotypes, come to believe them. Seems like the local education system has failed if people can't think critically or rationally. B

>many people, seeing only stereotypes, come to believe them. Seems like the local education system has failed if people can't think critically or rationally. Blaming the arts is wrong and only treats the symptom. Do you believe that all information needs to be carefully controlled so that people don't get the wrong ideas? If so, what are you doing on an open/liberal/libertarian forum like HN then? Anyone can post anything here, pretty much. Seems to me that you're going your own advice by being present here.

ashwinaj 11y ago
This. Thanks for posting this. Everyone likes to shirk personal responsibility and put the blame on others. If you are too challenged to distinguish between real life vs reel life, you should excuse yourself from such matters. EDIT: Thanks for the down votes, the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, isn't it?
- lotyrin 11y ago
  And matches are perfectly safe, if you don't happen to be surrounded by flammables. The simple facts are that we have a huge amount of ignorance in the audience for this show, this show takes advantage of that (it is targeted to folks who are not informed about the places and people and groups depicted, otherwise it wouldn't take such extreme artistic license with them) and will have an effect on the views of its audience. It doesn't matter what society we'd like to live in or how that might play out in theory.
  - ashwinaj 11y ago
    > And matches are perfectly safe, if you don't happen to be surrounded by flammables. My point goes back to personal responsibility. Whose fault is it if you're surrounded by flammables labeled appropriately? The analogy is that this is labeled as a "TV show" not a documentary.
    - lotyrin 11y ago
      You seem to have gotten caught on the analogy and failed to read my argument. It doesn't matter if something is fiction, the reality is that fiction has a great impact on its audience, and that impact comes with proportional responsibility. It does not matter what ideal rational actors should theoretically do when it comes to managing their opinions and knowledge about the world in the face of fiction, we don't have any of those. We don't get to pretend society works a particular way, just so we can justify bad television that uses real places and real names of groups in a farcical way because it's capitalizing on a contemporary societal phenomenon of fear and ignorance of those things.
    - intopieces 11y ago
      Why are the creators of the show absolved of their personal responsibility regarding the impact of their actions? If a company poisons the local reservoir with their chemical run-off, are they morally able to say, "Well, they shouldn't have drank that water. They knew they lived near a chemical plant." No, we trust fiction-based-on-reality to have a semblence of reality to it and to not be blatently racist. That's a cultural evolution we've developed. We are criticizing a show for not being what it should be. That's our responsibility as viewers, and we're fulfilling it.
      - ashwinaj 11y ago
        > Why are the creators of the show absolved of their personal responsibility regarding the impact of their actions? Because they aren't democratically elected public officials, they're just making a TV show from private funding. And watching the TV show is optional. > If a company poisons the local reservoir with their chemical run-off, are they morally able to say, "Well, they shouldn't have drank that water. They knew they lived near a chemical plant." That's a violation of environmental laws; how is this analogy applicable to a TV show? Would you propose to curtail the right to free speech? It's a TV show, not real life.
        icebraining 11y ago
        Nobody mentioned laws or curtailing their rights. Not everything is reduced to whether an action is legal or not. We can and should discuss whether something is ethical, and we can and should advocate for legal ways of opposing such things, like publicly criticizing it, boycotting the show, etc.
- icebraining 11y ago
  You're missing the larger point. If someone fails to distinguish between reality and fiction, that may be their fault. But if you know that many people are unable to properly distinguish the two, and you do something that you know may lead those to hurt innocent bystanders, don't you have some responsibility if the expected happens?
xsmasher 11y ago
> Do you believe that all information needs to be carefully controlled No, but nor should it be free from criticism.

ashwinaj 11y ago

This. Thanks for posting this. Everyone likes to shirk personal responsibility and put the blame on others. If you are too challenged to distinguish between real life vs reel life, you should excuse yourself from such matters. EDIT: Thanks for the down votes, the truth is a bitter pill to swallow, isn't it?

lotyrin 11y ago
And matches are perfectly safe, if you don't happen to be surrounded by flammables. The simple facts are that we have a huge amount of ignorance in the audience for this show, this show takes advantage of that (it is targeted to folks who are not informed about the places and people and groups depicted, otherwise it wouldn't take such extreme artistic license with them) and will have an effect on the views of its audience. It doesn't matter what society we'd like to live in or how that might play out in theory.
- ashwinaj 11y ago
  > And matches are perfectly safe, if you don't happen to be surrounded by flammables. My point goes back to personal responsibility. Whose fault is it if you're surrounded by flammables labeled appropriately? The analogy is that this is labeled as a "TV show" not a documentary.
  - lotyrin 11y ago
    You seem to have gotten caught on the analogy and failed to read my argument. It doesn't matter if something is fiction, the reality is that fiction has a great impact on its audience, and that impact comes with proportional responsibility. It does not matter what ideal rational actors should theoretically do when it comes to managing their opinions and knowledge about the world in the face of fiction, we don't have any of those. We don't get to pretend society works a particular way, just so we can justify bad television that uses real places and real names of groups in a farcical way because it's capitalizing on a contemporary societal phenomenon of fear and ignorance of those things.
  - intopieces 11y ago
    Why are the creators of the show absolved of their personal responsibility regarding the impact of their actions? If a company poisons the local reservoir with their chemical run-off, are they morally able to say, "Well, they shouldn't have drank that water. They knew they lived near a chemical plant." No, we trust fiction-based-on-reality to have a semblence of reality to it and to not be blatently racist. That's a cultural evolution we've developed. We are criticizing a show for not being what it should be. That's our responsibility as viewers, and we're fulfilling it.
    - ashwinaj 11y ago
      > Why are the creators of the show absolved of their personal responsibility regarding the impact of their actions? Because they aren't democratically elected public officials, they're just making a TV show from private funding. And watching the TV show is optional. > If a company poisons the local reservoir with their chemical run-off, are they morally able to say, "Well, they shouldn't have drank that water. They knew they lived near a chemical plant." That's a violation of environmental laws; how is this analogy applicable to a TV show? Would you propose to curtail the right to free speech? It's a TV show, not real life.
      - icebraining 11y ago
        Nobody mentioned laws or curtailing their rights. Not everything is reduced to whether an action is legal or not. We can and should discuss whether something is ethical, and we can and should advocate for legal ways of opposing such things, like publicly criticizing it, boycotting the show, etc.
icebraining 11y ago
You're missing the larger point. If someone fails to distinguish between reality and fiction, that may be their fault. But if you know that many people are unable to properly distinguish the two, and you do something that you know may lead those to hurt innocent bystanders, don't you have some responsibility if the expected happens?

xsmasher 11y ago

> Do you believe that all information needs to be carefully controlled No, but nor should it be free from criticism.