4 ms·

>Infowars objectively did a better job reporting the facts of the case than the New York Times Can you whack jobs stay on 4chan and Reddit please? It's bad eno

by DGAP 10y ago

>Infowars objectively did a better job reporting the facts of the case than the New York Times Can you whack jobs stay on 4chan and Reddit please? It's bad enough you've taken over Twitter and the US government.

rtx 10y ago
Being concerned about children is not a wack job. With yesterdays arrest in Norway and allegations about UK elites. Why do you think same can't happen in America.
- md_ 10y ago
  Assuming you're serious: Is there any evidence for the accusation? On its face, the whole claim appears to be entirely baseless and without merit, and its defenders appear to argue that it's hard to disprove so it deserves credence. Am I missing something? I read the subreddit (before it was shut down) and was quite unable to tell if it's just a big Internet in-joke or if the participants are serious. Are they serious? If so, why?
  - camperman 10y ago
    It was deadly serious. But the evidence is purely circumstantial. However, the more you dig the more data you find. From another comment of mine: James Alefantis posts suggestive pictures of children on his Instagram AND He makes lewd comments about them AND Many of his friends do too AND Some of those friends are into weird things like making child-sized coffins AND There's FBI-confirmed pedophile codes and symbols everywhere AND Alefantis knows John Podesta WHO is into Spirit Cooking with Marina Abramovic AND Podesta hangs disturbing child abuse-style art on his wall AND He likes artists who produce disturbing images of abuse AND His emails have masonic images hidden in the attachments AS WELL AS Pictures of children with notes saying "Happy Birthday John" AND contacts of his mail him with messages promising "entertainment" from the young children in the pool AND He and his brother look EXACTLY like the photofits of two men who abducted Madeleine McCann in 2007 AND they were connected to the McCanns through a mutual friend who lived nearby AND .... There's literally thousands of people digging and all they do is keep throwing up more connections and suggestions that there is a pedophile ring hiding in plain sight.
    - vehementi 10y ago
      I've seen this sort of thing (reddit+4chan conspiracy theory witch hunts) most aptly described as "weaponized autism"
      - camperman 10y ago
        Indeed. Except this time they're searching for real witches who kill real children.
justin_vanw 10y ago
I think the media went out of their way to slant things towards Hillary in this election. I suspect they consensus in the media was something like "we created this monster, now we have to kill it" regarding Trump. To me this was both wrong, since it basically ignored the basic responsibility of the media in our civilization, and counter productive, since it was so obvious that they were 'in the bag' that people stopped trusting the major news outlets entirely and started getting their 'information' from non-traditional sources, like the alt-media, social networks, etc. So you can say that everyone is a bunch of 'whack jobs', but it seems like we have a competition here between the 'traditional media' who are being incredibly dishonest and more or less repeating talking points from the DNC, the 'marginally traditional' media like fox news, which is just as much in the bag for the right and so also not really a trustworthy source of information, and the 'other stuff' people are now getting information from, which is just a total mess of false information and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories mixed into all the actual things going on in the world. So if you want to blame someone, blame the traditional media, of all the things that happened they were the only ones who abandoned their responsibility, and everything else followed from that.
- md_ 10y ago
  The equivalence you draw is terrifying (and, I think, false, but mostly terrifying). Yes, in a sense I think it's true that the "traditional media" is probably mostly staffed by people who tend to oppose the Trump presidency. But this is for two very specific reasons: 1. Trump ran a divisive campaign that was in many ways--perhaps primarily--a campaign against both the demographics of most media reporters and the actual institutions of media itself. Reporters, being humans with feelings, probably did respond to that a bit. 2. Trump ran a campaign that was founded on literal falsehoods. Extending reporters some degree of professional respect, I tend to believe #2 is the primary factor here. The terrifying equivalence here is between "traditional media" reporting factual truths where you can kinda-sorta-sometimes tell that the reporter probably doesn't respect Trump as a candidate and "alt media" reporting things of huge consequence that never happened and have no basis in fact. Those are fundamentally different things, and what truly worries me about both the stupid shit like "pizzagate" and the significant lies (on economic measures, on science, on documented reality as we know it) is that our politics appear to have become unstuck from consensus reality. There's no rational discussion--and, I believe, truly no hope for the democratic process--if we're not arguing about mutually agreed-upon facts. Yet that's where we are.

by DGAP 10y ago

rtx 10y ago

Being concerned about children is not a wack job. With yesterdays arrest in Norway and allegations about UK elites. Why do you think same can't happen in America.

md_ 10y ago
Assuming you're serious: Is there any evidence for the accusation? On its face, the whole claim appears to be entirely baseless and without merit, and its defenders appear to argue that it's hard to disprove so it deserves credence. Am I missing something? I read the subreddit (before it was shut down) and was quite unable to tell if it's just a big Internet in-joke or if the participants are serious. Are they serious? If so, why?
- camperman 10y ago
  It was deadly serious. But the evidence is purely circumstantial. However, the more you dig the more data you find. From another comment of mine: James Alefantis posts suggestive pictures of children on his Instagram AND He makes lewd comments about them AND Many of his friends do too AND Some of those friends are into weird things like making child-sized coffins AND There's FBI-confirmed pedophile codes and symbols everywhere AND Alefantis knows John Podesta WHO is into Spirit Cooking with Marina Abramovic AND Podesta hangs disturbing child abuse-style art on his wall AND He likes artists who produce disturbing images of abuse AND His emails have masonic images hidden in the attachments AS WELL AS Pictures of children with notes saying "Happy Birthday John" AND contacts of his mail him with messages promising "entertainment" from the young children in the pool AND He and his brother look EXACTLY like the photofits of two men who abducted Madeleine McCann in 2007 AND they were connected to the McCanns through a mutual friend who lived nearby AND .... There's literally thousands of people digging and all they do is keep throwing up more connections and suggestions that there is a pedophile ring hiding in plain sight.
  - vehementi 10y ago
    I've seen this sort of thing (reddit+4chan conspiracy theory witch hunts) most aptly described as "weaponized autism"
    - camperman 10y ago
      Indeed. Except this time they're searching for real witches who kill real children.

justin_vanw 10y ago

I think the media went out of their way to slant things towards Hillary in this election. I suspect they consensus in the media was something like "we created this monster, now we have to kill it" regarding Trump. To me this was both wrong, since it basically ignored the basic responsibility of the media in our civilization, and counter productive, since it was so obvious that they were 'in the bag' that people stopped trusting the major news outlets entirely and started getting their 'information' from non-traditional sources, like the alt-media, social networks, etc. So you can say that everyone is a bunch of 'whack jobs', but it seems like we have a competition here between the 'traditional media' who are being incredibly dishonest and more or less repeating talking points from the DNC, the 'marginally traditional' media like fox news, which is just as much in the bag for the right and so also not really a trustworthy source of information, and the 'other stuff' people are now getting information from, which is just a total mess of false information and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories mixed into all the actual things going on in the world. So if you want to blame someone, blame the traditional media, of all the things that happened they were the only ones who abandoned their responsibility, and everything else followed from that.

md_ 10y ago
The equivalence you draw is terrifying (and, I think, false, but mostly terrifying). Yes, in a sense I think it's true that the "traditional media" is probably mostly staffed by people who tend to oppose the Trump presidency. But this is for two very specific reasons: 1. Trump ran a divisive campaign that was in many ways--perhaps primarily--a campaign against both the demographics of most media reporters and the actual institutions of media itself. Reporters, being humans with feelings, probably did respond to that a bit. 2. Trump ran a campaign that was founded on literal falsehoods. Extending reporters some degree of professional respect, I tend to believe #2 is the primary factor here. The terrifying equivalence here is between "traditional media" reporting factual truths where you can kinda-sorta-sometimes tell that the reporter probably doesn't respect Trump as a candidate and "alt media" reporting things of huge consequence that never happened and have no basis in fact. Those are fundamentally different things, and what truly worries me about both the stupid shit like "pizzagate" and the significant lies (on economic measures, on science, on documented reality as we know it) is that our politics appear to have become unstuck from consensus reality. There's no rational discussion--and, I believe, truly no hope for the democratic process--if we're not arguing about mutually agreed-upon facts. Yet that's where we are.