5 ms·

I should bloody well hope that anyone with a brain has a bias against astro-turf fake-populist wanna-be dictators. We owe no consideration to deliberately-dest

I should bloody well hope that anyone with a brain has a bias against astro-turf fake-populist wanna-be dictators. We owe no consideration to deliberately-destructive trolls seeking to undermine all notions of civility and social progress merely to feed Rupert Murdochs empire of faeces further banquet tables full of roasted dead orphans. Breitbart, OTOH, is precisely a harmful entity seeking to undermine all that is decent and good.

justaaron 8y ago
But no, Google news is not ignoring or de-prioritizing their filth-cum-journalism. I am obviously not their target reader, and yet my news.google.com feed contains plenty of Fox propaganda. Google obviously has no qualms about a "moron tax" sheesh, look at Youtube. it's full of alt-right tripe.
- tkmo 8y ago
  Of course this thread is guaranteed to be an absolute shit show, but it's revealing the level of intense emotiveness shown by your post and the one before it, and most of all by the Google execs. Were this directed at a tiny ideological fraction of the population it could be OK, but we are talking about give or take half of the voters of the USA, UK, Poland, Hungary, Austria, etc., etc. And when Google has such a near monopoly on massive swathes of the web that is quite concerning.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Not sure where you’re getting the numbers to back up your 50% claim. At most it is around 15% in UK, 30% in the US and somewhat higher in the Eastern European countries. Alt right conservatism is not a mainstream ideology anywhere in the world. Nor will it ever the way things are going.
    - tkmo 8y ago
      In proper terms, perhaps, but things like Trump, Brexit, and strongly anti-immigrant, populist conservative, leaders like Salvini, Orban, etc., in Europe, are all generally placed in the same camp by the media. Ultimately we are discussing the visible rage and despisement towards the winnning side of a national US election vote. That is incredibly concerning coming from a company as powerful as Google, and we know the same sentiment is shared across Hollywood and the mass media.
      - threeseed 8y ago
        The concern around Trump extends to close to 70% of the electorate according to recent polling. It isn’t isolated. And given Trump’s anti-immigrant stance Google executives being immigrants themselves would have every right to voice their concern.
        tkmo 8y ago
        Trump's stance is anti illegal immigrant which should not affect any Google execs. Re: approval ratings, its a moot point. Trump has enjoyed generally similar approval ratings to Obama (at most single digit percentage points lower) and ultimately won a free and fair election in a first world Republic. Having the leaders of a global monopoly megacorporation display this kind of disdain for the elected leader of the country and everyone who supports him, and (by implication) similar populist leaders across Europe (and their supporters), is extremely, deeply, disconcerting.
        hef19898 8y ago
        Electorate college? Gerrymandering? And I hope you are not seriously stating that a company cannot have political views opposed to the government? It's either a democratic election (to have a legitimate government) which implies different opinions regardless of majorites or not (so that nobody can oppose the government). You cannot have it both ways.
        nailer 8y ago
        Google's executives are quite obviously not illegal immigrants. Pretending they're affected by tighter border controls is disingenuous.
    - nailer 8y ago
      'Alt right' is a vague term, and has been since Richard Spencer claimed it and regular conservative folk stopped using it. Strong border controls are quite obviously supported by far more than 15% of the UK population (and I say that as an immigrant to the UK) - look at the Brexit vote.
  - hef19898 8y ago
    Just two things. First, any hatred directed any group regardless of size is simply not acceptable in a free, modern society as it would undermine democratic principles. Second, in a free and modern society it is ok to have diametrical oppossed views to any other Group. Which is an integral part of Democracy. Funny enough, there are always people, mostly with pretty radical views, that are severly infuriated by contrarian views. The other way round it is just fine.
oriol16 8y ago
Oh wow. It turns out liberals aren't so polite and respectful as they claim to be.
- tkmo 8y ago
  Of course intense seething long term anger of this sort is usually indicative of cognitive dissonance (as liberals easily notice within groups like religious fundamentalists.) Apparently turning the mirror of objectivity on themselves is highly difficult though.
- mikejb 8y ago
  You have to be a liberal to dislike Trump? What the fuck is up with all this "you have to be in one of two buckets" mentality?
  - oriol16 8y ago
    I inferred he self-describes as liberal based on the vulgar language.
titzer 8y ago
Is this really the top rated comment? sigh, I think we can do better. > We owe no consideration to deliberately-destructive trolls... Oh man, here we go. Look, there are trolls and there are populists and fascists and neo-Nazis and anarchists and racists and scumbags and dickheads and all of those NAMES out there. Yeah! Fuck those NAMES! BURN! ..it fixes nothing to piss further into the pool. And then to turn around and call it fixed, or not fixable. How does that fix anything to be nasty right back and then convince yourself you can ignore them? That by ignoring them you are ignoring all this nastiness? Don't you think your nastiness validates their nastiness, even if you think anti-nastiness nastiness will make things better? That's a trap. We're all devalued when we inject even more bad karma into this crap ball. We need to define ourselves by what we want the culture to be, not by the people who think are our political enemies. So, how about instead: we actually define what is acceptable in our culture and where the line is. And then when people step over the line, we don't demonize them as bad people who seek to wreck all that is holy and good, we point out how they violated the acceptable cultural norms in a non-aggressive, non-offensive way. And then we consistently return to actions and words and not assumptions of motives and further othering of people. That way, instead of the dialog being about people's feelings and motivations, it's about how they violated the norms by actually doing something that is in direct violation of our acceptable norms, e.g. personal insults. > Breitbart, OTOH, is precisely a harmful entity seeking to undermine all that is decent and good. See. You are getting precisely nowhere with this, unless you consider polarization to be somewhere. I mean, seriously. What the heck do you expect? This is no dialog. They're just all bad people who hate, hate, hate. So you hate them back. Cycle.
- sehugg 8y ago
  Breitbart openly advocates for the destruction of the press, which they call the "Democrat-media complex". Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances.
  - liftbigweights 8y ago
    Which is their right as press. Also, you are forgetting it's a two way street. The other side is calling for the destruction of the press as well. The only difference is that CNN and NYTimes have the power to destroy other press. Smaller companies like Breitbart and Infowars cannot. How about we protect free speech and free press? > Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances. Exactly. It's why nobody trusts media anymore. It's a real concern for society. And nobody in media appears to want to address it. Rather they are doubling down and making the situation even worse.
lanestp 8y ago
Civility? Yes, this comment reeks of that. I’m interested in what good you think you are doing with this kind of vitriol? Do you think it furthers your side of the argument? I can assure you that it does not. “Deliberately destructive trolls” is interesting phrasing when held up against “roasted dead orphans.” If we owe no consideration to the former, you prove yourself such with the latter.
liftbigweights 8y ago
Do you realize you sound exactly like the people you are attacking. After you've calmed down, try reading your comment. It's just amazing seeing people ruled by emotion rather than rationality. Also, why are so many foreigners so obsessed over US politics. I swear every top political comment on every social media platform seems to be from a brit or a canadian. Everything is going to be okay. Trump is going to be gone in 2 or 6 years at most. You'll have another president to be angry about. Trump isn't the end of the world. I thought people couldn't get any crazier after obama's election and the birther/tea party movement. Boy was I proved wrong.

justaaron 8y ago

But no, Google news is not ignoring or de-prioritizing their filth-cum-journalism. I am obviously not their target reader, and yet my news.google.com feed contains plenty of Fox propaganda. Google obviously has no qualms about a "moron tax" sheesh, look at Youtube. it's full of alt-right tripe.

tkmo 8y ago
Of course this thread is guaranteed to be an absolute shit show, but it's revealing the level of intense emotiveness shown by your post and the one before it, and most of all by the Google execs. Were this directed at a tiny ideological fraction of the population it could be OK, but we are talking about give or take half of the voters of the USA, UK, Poland, Hungary, Austria, etc., etc. And when Google has such a near monopoly on massive swathes of the web that is quite concerning.
- threeseed 8y ago
  Not sure where you’re getting the numbers to back up your 50% claim. At most it is around 15% in UK, 30% in the US and somewhat higher in the Eastern European countries. Alt right conservatism is not a mainstream ideology anywhere in the world. Nor will it ever the way things are going.
  - tkmo 8y ago
    In proper terms, perhaps, but things like Trump, Brexit, and strongly anti-immigrant, populist conservative, leaders like Salvini, Orban, etc., in Europe, are all generally placed in the same camp by the media. Ultimately we are discussing the visible rage and despisement towards the winnning side of a national US election vote. That is incredibly concerning coming from a company as powerful as Google, and we know the same sentiment is shared across Hollywood and the mass media.
    - threeseed 8y ago
      The concern around Trump extends to close to 70% of the electorate according to recent polling. It isn’t isolated. And given Trump’s anti-immigrant stance Google executives being immigrants themselves would have every right to voice their concern.
      - tkmo 8y ago
        Trump's stance is anti illegal immigrant which should not affect any Google execs. Re: approval ratings, its a moot point. Trump has enjoyed generally similar approval ratings to Obama (at most single digit percentage points lower) and ultimately won a free and fair election in a first world Republic. Having the leaders of a global monopoly megacorporation display this kind of disdain for the elected leader of the country and everyone who supports him, and (by implication) similar populist leaders across Europe (and their supporters), is extremely, deeply, disconcerting.
        hef19898 8y ago
        Electorate college? Gerrymandering? And I hope you are not seriously stating that a company cannot have political views opposed to the government? It's either a democratic election (to have a legitimate government) which implies different opinions regardless of majorites or not (so that nobody can oppose the government). You cannot have it both ways.
      - nailer 8y ago
        Google's executives are quite obviously not illegal immigrants. Pretending they're affected by tighter border controls is disingenuous.
  - nailer 8y ago
    'Alt right' is a vague term, and has been since Richard Spencer claimed it and regular conservative folk stopped using it. Strong border controls are quite obviously supported by far more than 15% of the UK population (and I say that as an immigrant to the UK) - look at the Brexit vote.
- hef19898 8y ago
  Just two things. First, any hatred directed any group regardless of size is simply not acceptable in a free, modern society as it would undermine democratic principles. Second, in a free and modern society it is ok to have diametrical oppossed views to any other Group. Which is an integral part of Democracy. Funny enough, there are always people, mostly with pretty radical views, that are severly infuriated by contrarian views. The other way round it is just fine.

oriol16 8y ago

Oh wow. It turns out liberals aren't so polite and respectful as they claim to be.

tkmo 8y ago
Of course intense seething long term anger of this sort is usually indicative of cognitive dissonance (as liberals easily notice within groups like religious fundamentalists.) Apparently turning the mirror of objectivity on themselves is highly difficult though.
mikejb 8y ago
You have to be a liberal to dislike Trump? What the fuck is up with all this "you have to be in one of two buckets" mentality?
- oriol16 8y ago
  I inferred he self-describes as liberal based on the vulgar language.

titzer 8y ago

Is this really the top rated comment? sigh, I think we can do better. > We owe no consideration to deliberately-destructive trolls... Oh man, here we go. Look, there are trolls and there are populists and fascists and neo-Nazis and anarchists and racists and scumbags and dickheads and all of those NAMES out there. Yeah! Fuck those NAMES! BURN! ..it fixes nothing to piss further into the pool. And then to turn around and call it fixed, or not fixable. How does that fix anything to be nasty right back and then convince yourself you can ignore them? That by ignoring them you are ignoring all this nastiness? Don't you think your nastiness validates their nastiness, even if you think anti-nastiness nastiness will make things better? That's a trap. We're all devalued when we inject even more bad karma into this crap ball. We need to define ourselves by what we want the culture to be, not by the people who think are our political enemies. So, how about instead: we actually define what is acceptable in our culture and where the line is. And then when people step over the line, we don't demonize them as bad people who seek to wreck all that is holy and good, we point out how they violated the acceptable cultural norms in a non-aggressive, non-offensive way. And then we consistently return to actions and words and not assumptions of motives and further othering of people. That way, instead of the dialog being about people's feelings and motivations, it's about how they violated the norms by actually doing something that is in direct violation of our acceptable norms, e.g. personal insults. > Breitbart, OTOH, is precisely a harmful entity seeking to undermine all that is decent and good. See. You are getting precisely nowhere with this, unless you consider polarization to be somewhere. I mean, seriously. What the heck do you expect? This is no dialog. They're just all bad people who hate, hate, hate. So you hate them back. Cycle.

sehugg 8y ago
Breitbart openly advocates for the destruction of the press, which they call the "Democrat-media complex". Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances.
- liftbigweights 8y ago
  Which is their right as press. Also, you are forgetting it's a two way street. The other side is calling for the destruction of the press as well. The only difference is that CNN and NYTimes have the power to destroy other press. Smaller companies like Breitbart and Infowars cannot. How about we protect free speech and free press? > Hard to deal in good faith under those circumstances. Exactly. It's why nobody trusts media anymore. It's a real concern for society. And nobody in media appears to want to address it. Rather they are doubling down and making the situation even worse.

lanestp 8y ago

Civility? Yes, this comment reeks of that. I’m interested in what good you think you are doing with this kind of vitriol? Do you think it furthers your side of the argument? I can assure you that it does not. “Deliberately destructive trolls” is interesting phrasing when held up against “roasted dead orphans.” If we owe no consideration to the former, you prove yourself such with the latter.

liftbigweights 8y ago

Do you realize you sound exactly like the people you are attacking. After you've calmed down, try reading your comment. It's just amazing seeing people ruled by emotion rather than rationality. Also, why are so many foreigners so obsessed over US politics. I swear every top political comment on every social media platform seems to be from a brit or a canadian. Everything is going to be okay. Trump is going to be gone in 2 or 6 years at most. You'll have another president to be angry about. Trump isn't the end of the world. I thought people couldn't get any crazier after obama's election and the birther/tea party movement. Boy was I proved wrong.