3 ms·
I'll try again. And that's it. You are concerned that this piece is wrong/misleading. Ok. Great. Another person wrong on the internet. Now, from a meta level
by DanielBMarkham 8y ago
I'll try again. And that's it.
You are concerned that this piece is wrong/misleading.
Ok. Great. Another person wrong on the internet.
Now, from a meta level, can you accept that the public discussion about data harvesting, like everything else is going to be politicized? And would you rather understand and engage people of all political persuasions by following their arguments, or are you happy just being in teams?
I like understanding both sides, seeing where they are going. That way I can have reasonable conversations with them.
Innocuous has nothing to do with anything. In fact, I'd argue that it's not innocuous. It's important. That's why we need to understand it.
You realize, of course, that both sides look equally nutty to the other, right? I'm watching it rain and friends of both political parties spin up the most fantastical explanations for why it's raining. I find that fascinating. I also need to talk to them about coming the hell in out of the rain, so I choose to understand first, then be understood.
Nobody's trying to soft-pedal anything. There's no whitewashing here. The perception is the reality. That's the way humans work. The causal, pseudo-scientific part of things? Different conversation entirely. Stop mixing them up.
- creato 8y agoYou are basically regurgitating a bunch of points that apply more to what you are saying than what I am saying. When you align yourself (presumably concerned about data harvesting) with people that think facebook/google are suppressing conservative speech, who is it that is just happy being in teams? > You are concerned that this piece is wrong/misleading. No, my concern is that by hitching the data harvesting wagon to the Tucker Carlson/Fox News clown show, you will be politicizing an issue that should be apolitical.
- vatueil 8y agoListening to different political viewpoints can be good. I make sure to do so myself on many occasions. However, the criticisms regarding this film raised in other comments and linked articles appear to be valid. It concerns me that you have repeatedly dismissed these objections as "slander", even before watching the film according to your own words. You don't have to agree with someone's politics to work together on common ground, of course. And a film with a message may be worth watching even or especially if it challenges your views. But the film's agenda cannot be concealed. The Verge article, for example, made no bones about its political views but also raised factual concerns about the film. It is also a fact, as others have pointed out, that the writer and director of this film, M.A. Taylor, also worked on political films such as Hype: The Obama Effect (which detailed "various questions about Barack Obama's past") and co-directed Clinton Cash along with former Brietbart chairman Steve Bannon: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3379741/ https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3379741/