3 ms·

You are correct, I didn't. But it's precisely because there's a really good record of misinformation by the UK government. Not that they are any different from

You are correct, I didn't. But it's precisely because there's a really good record of misinformation by the UK government. Not that they are any different from other governments in that respect. So, pardon me if I am a nihilist. I just remember Powell with 'yellow cake from Iraq' in UN and how Bush/Blaire government didn't really have any objections from US/UK media who were all too happy to spread misinformation in order to justify whatever needed to be justified (starting a war, for example). It's not really any different now with Syria or the Skripals in my view. I might have read the report had it been titled 'The speared of unauthorized disinformation and truths we don't approve of'.

frereubu 8y ago
Nihilism is the easy way out, because it absolves you of the responsibility to maintain some perspective. I get the fact that it's difficult to remain level-headed given the current political situation, but for every terrible story about governments - and there are many - there are enormous amounts of hard working people who are actually trying to do some good, and often achieve it. This report wasn't written by the government, it was a cross-party group of MPs, so it doesn't serve one political party over another. Do some of them have conflicts of interest? Perhaps, but unlikely given the seriousness with which the register of interests is taken in the UK parliament. If you're in the UK, you have the opportunity to visit your MP at one of their constituency surgeries and raise any issues you have with them. I presume the same is true in most modern democracies. Most politicians I've met (I'm in the UK) are doing what they're doing in good faith, whether I agreed with them or not.
- JackPoach 8y ago
  I disagree with you. In my opinion fake news is a very convenient way for the government or the big tech to censor any dissent. Simply label anything 'fake news' or try to equate euroskepticism/conservatism to antivaccination and you win. You've got to be blind not to see that the 'fake news' narrative is used by the government to control the agenda. If it's nihilism or easy way out - fine. I'm not buying it. I've watched Alex Jones quite a bit 5-10 years ago. Yeah, he's batshit crazy, but when YouTube and Facebook banned Infowars, that's a very, very bad sign. I means that you can label anyone as 'another Alex Jones' and ban them. And politicians love having this option, apparently. Like what's happening to RT in UK, for example.

frereubu 8y ago

Nihilism is the easy way out, because it absolves you of the responsibility to maintain some perspective. I get the fact that it's difficult to remain level-headed given the current political situation, but for every terrible story about governments - and there are many - there are enormous amounts of hard working people who are actually trying to do some good, and often achieve it. This report wasn't written by the government, it was a cross-party group of MPs, so it doesn't serve one political party over another. Do some of them have conflicts of interest? Perhaps, but unlikely given the seriousness with which the register of interests is taken in the UK parliament. If you're in the UK, you have the opportunity to visit your MP at one of their constituency surgeries and raise any issues you have with them. I presume the same is true in most modern democracies. Most politicians I've met (I'm in the UK) are doing what they're doing in good faith, whether I agreed with them or not.

JackPoach 8y ago
I disagree with you. In my opinion fake news is a very convenient way for the government or the big tech to censor any dissent. Simply label anything 'fake news' or try to equate euroskepticism/conservatism to antivaccination and you win. You've got to be blind not to see that the 'fake news' narrative is used by the government to control the agenda. If it's nihilism or easy way out - fine. I'm not buying it. I've watched Alex Jones quite a bit 5-10 years ago. Yeah, he's batshit crazy, but when YouTube and Facebook banned Infowars, that's a very, very bad sign. I means that you can label anyone as 'another Alex Jones' and ban them. And politicians love having this option, apparently. Like what's happening to RT in UK, for example.