3 ms·

I guess you never argued with Trumpers on the Internet at election time. The Fake news were widely distributed and very frustrating to argue against! The templa

by ralfd 10y ago

I guess you never argued with Trumpers on the Internet at election time. The Fake news were widely distributed and very frustrating to argue against! The template is practically a hack of human laziness and selective bias. Example: http://archive.is/9CXYO http://archive.is/9CXYO This archive of a disreputable website has an article that claims Clinton bribed prominent Republicans (which were at that time Trumps opponents in the primary). It even links Wikileaks and gives an id for the email. Only ... the ID simply doesn't exist. It even made it into an Interview of Hannity with Assange: https://www.reddit.com/r/WhereIsAssange/comments/5ion2c/full_transcript_julian_assange_with_sean_hannity/ https://www.reddit.com/r/WhereIsAssange/comments/5ion2c/full... > Hannity: Let me ask you about Wikileaks. I think this could shake up the political world. Is it true that an email sent in July of this year that you have, that describes how funds could be diverted from the Clinton campaign to the super PACs of Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, and John Kasick. Specifically document number 1078645. Assange: I don't have that in front of me. We have published nearly 100,000 documents so. I mean I have seen references to things like that. I don't recall seeing an 'eyes only' phrase. Assange didn't recall it because there is no email. The whole story was made up as clickbait for conservatives. But even Assange guards his statement, because it is normal that one doesn't recall everything, right? Another example was a story about Supreme Court justice Ginsberg. Another clickbait website made up a quote of her and linked as proof an interview of Ginsburg in the NYTimes. And the NYT is reputable, right? Only the quote is fictional it never was in the NYT article. In a time were many people just read the headline and skim the rest (if at all) and sharing via social media is one click away, this is disappointingly effective. http://www.snopes.com/ruth-ginsburg-president-resign/ http://www.snopes.com/ruth-ginsburg-president-resign/

yummyfajitas 10y ago
All the Trump supporters I know seem far more knowledgeable than the Trump opponents, and the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own. (This is almost certainly due to selection bias - Trump hatred is a socially required belief in my circles, while Trump support is a very unusual position adopted only after careful thought and kept carefully hidden.) There are many silly beliefs that Trump opponents have picked up from the mainstream media. For instance, compare beliefs about Trump-inspired crime to reality - most are hoaxes perpetrated by Trump opponents, and the most serious incidents (e.g. the kidnapping/torture of a mental retard) were committed by Trump opponents. Or beliefs that Bannon and Trump are somehow antisemitic Nazis. Never mind that Trump was mentored by (((Roy Cohn))) and that the key people in his organization are (((Allen Weisenberg))), (((Michael Cohen))) and (((Jason Greenblatt))). Somehow (((Jared Kushner))) and (((Ivanka Trump))) are also involved. Not to mention that Bannon's rise to power came from working with (((Andrew Breitbart))), and he's secretly communicating with (((Curtis Yarvin))). [1] Strangely, these crazy beliefs are never cited when discussing fake news. They just aren't part of the narrative. That's why I characterize this "fake news" push as propaganda - it's only about keeping non-mainstream sources out of the narrative. [1] I'm only using the alt-right ((())) to emphasize what actual anti-semitic people would think of Trump.
- B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
  > the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own. Chiefly that owners have the cattle's best interests in mind and will tell them the truth. (Actually, they mostly do. The advertisers are mainly very selective about the facts they publish. And the way they wrap them up for delivery. "Never give a sucker an even break" as one famous advertiser candidly put it.)

by ralfd 10y ago

yummyfajitas 10y ago

All the Trump supporters I know seem far more knowledgeable than the Trump opponents, and the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own. (This is almost certainly due to selection bias - Trump hatred is a socially required belief in my circles, while Trump support is a very unusual position adopted only after careful thought and kept carefully hidden.) There are many silly beliefs that Trump opponents have picked up from the mainstream media. For instance, compare beliefs about Trump-inspired crime to reality - most are hoaxes perpetrated by Trump opponents, and the most serious incidents (e.g. the kidnapping/torture of a mental retard) were committed by Trump opponents. Or beliefs that Bannon and Trump are somehow antisemitic Nazis. Never mind that Trump was mentored by (((Roy Cohn))) and that the key people in his organization are (((Allen Weisenberg))), (((Michael Cohen))) and (((Jason Greenblatt))). Somehow (((Jared Kushner))) and (((Ivanka Trump))) are also involved. Not to mention that Bannon's rise to power came from working with (((Andrew Breitbart))), and he's secretly communicating with (((Curtis Yarvin))). [1] Strangely, these crazy beliefs are never cited when discussing fake news. They just aren't part of the narrative. That's why I characterize this "fake news" push as propaganda - it's only about keeping non-mainstream sources out of the narrative. [1] I'm only using the alt-right ((())) to emphasize what actual anti-semitic people would think of Trump.

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
> the opponents have all sorts of silly beliefs of their own. Chiefly that owners have the cattle's best interests in mind and will tell them the truth. (Actually, they mostly do. The advertisers are mainly very selective about the facts they publish. And the way they wrap them up for delivery. "Never give a sucker an even break" as one famous advertiser candidly put it.)