4 ms·

> People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People ar

> People are out there protesting because the problem is bad enough that it warrants risking lives over. And not just in an "I might catch COVID" way: People are being teargassed and shot. I think the vast, vast majority are truly risking nothing and know it. What you see in the media are the tiny minority who know what they're getting into. > This cuts both ways: there's a lot of people who have a vested interest in making things appear better than they are. Consider this: I'm an outsider, and have no horse in that demented race. I follow what's happening over there because what does happen may impact my country. What I see does not look good, and there isn't really a debate about this on this side of the atlantic. I understand what you see doesn't look good, but what you're seeing is entirely filtered through what traditional and social media want you to see. You (presumably) don't have family all over the country you stay in contact with who know what it's really like here. And what is it like? There were some protests in certain areas of big cities. For everyone else (the vast, vast majority), it was just another weekend. > The fact that whether your country is doing as bad as it appears to be is even in question just shows how divisive your media is. Media is supposed to be divisive. If you're getting only one perspective from your media, you should already be concerned. > Well I'm glad to read that, but in this thread, warrantless browser history requests aren't the only thing you've been downplaying. Personally, I think you're trying to convince yourself that things aren't "that bad". The longer you do so, the harder it's going to hit when you realize not only it is that bad, but it's only gotten worse since. We're not at war. COVID-19 is on the way out. The fact that people are protesting over-emphasized police brutality is evidence things aren't as bad as they are. They're not protesting a lack of food, or access to drinkable water. Let's try and keep things in perspective here.

scrollaway 6y ago
I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. > Media is supposed to be divisive. Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse.
- moduspol 6y ago
  > I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. I don't know what to tell you then. Consider getting more friends in the US if you want a realistic view of the country. > Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. No, news is supposed to be neutral. And again: if you're only getting one perspective, you're not getting others. It sounds like you've already heard all you want to. > You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse. I think a key sign of a successful society is when people are free to (and do) protest issues that are not nearly as serious as they think they are. It's not a sign of failure, it's a sign of success. If you step out of the media bubble, you might realize COVID-19, police brutality, and racism aren't nearly as bad as portrayed--at least in the vast majority of areas. But don't let that compromise your view.
  - scrollaway 6y ago
    > Consider getting more friends in the US if you want a realistic view of the country. I certainly lost contact with some people who started getting increasingly angry at everyone and everything. Lashing out on others like the world is out to get them. I'm sure if I kept in touch they'd give me their ever-so-rosy point of view on how well America is doing right now but it doesn't take a genius to figure out their point of view is an illusion they barely believe themselves. I'm going to stop arguing now because you're starting to say things that are blatantly wrong and it feels like you're baiting me into a bigger argument than this is worth. I'm just offering you a perspective from another corner of the globe, that isn't biased by your media you so proudly declare is supposed to be divisive. You're free to ignore it. You're free to think you're better-informed by consuming twice as much clickbaity media rather than half as much neutral media. I don't gain anything by correcting you, after all.
nl 6y ago
> Media is supposed to be divisive. Do you mean "media is supposed to be diverse"? Because that's a goal which is commonly held to be good. I've literally never heard anyone say "Media is supposed to be divisive", nor heard the case for it. I'm going to assume that was a typo? For the record: Diverse: showing a great deal of variety; very different. Diversive: tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people.
- moduspol 6y ago
  I mean, probably, yes. What I mean is that if you are consuming news media and seeing only one point of view, something is wrong. I feel like I frequently see commenters who implicitly believe there's only one valid side to an issue, and the other side is just racism / bigotry / corruption. True, that's a call for diversity. But if you're seeing multiple perspectives butting heads consistently across the news media consumed by an entire country, that's divisive, as a result of having diverse perspectives and coverage. To your point, though, that's likely more the result of a lack of diversity at individual sources and people picking and choosing to consume less diverse news. "Divisive" isn't the right word.

scrollaway 6y ago

I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. > Media is supposed to be divisive. Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse.

moduspol 6y ago
> I don't have family but I do have a lot of friends over there in the US. Several of them used to have your nonchalant view of "all this won't affect me". None of them have it today anymore. One is leaving the US. I don't know what to tell you then. Consider getting more friends in the US if you want a realistic view of the country. > Oof. This is on the same level as hearing "my SO is supposed to hit me when I'm wrong". Media is supposed to be neutral and bring you the facts. Your media clearly doesn't do that, but it's certainly not supposed to be that way. No, news is supposed to be neutral. And again: if you're only getting one perspective, you're not getting others. It sounds like you've already heard all you want to. > You're trying to "keep things in perspective" because you think you're arguing with people who believe you're North Korea. If I believed that, I wouldn't be wasting my time arguing, because by that point it would be too late. Things are really bad for the US right now, and they're headed for worse. You can keep arguing about exactly how bad it is, or you can start to think about how you can help prevent them from getting worse. I think a key sign of a successful society is when people are free to (and do) protest issues that are not nearly as serious as they think they are. It's not a sign of failure, it's a sign of success. If you step out of the media bubble, you might realize COVID-19, police brutality, and racism aren't nearly as bad as portrayed--at least in the vast majority of areas. But don't let that compromise your view.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  > Consider getting more friends in the US if you want a realistic view of the country. I certainly lost contact with some people who started getting increasingly angry at everyone and everything. Lashing out on others like the world is out to get them. I'm sure if I kept in touch they'd give me their ever-so-rosy point of view on how well America is doing right now but it doesn't take a genius to figure out their point of view is an illusion they barely believe themselves. I'm going to stop arguing now because you're starting to say things that are blatantly wrong and it feels like you're baiting me into a bigger argument than this is worth. I'm just offering you a perspective from another corner of the globe, that isn't biased by your media you so proudly declare is supposed to be divisive. You're free to ignore it. You're free to think you're better-informed by consuming twice as much clickbaity media rather than half as much neutral media. I don't gain anything by correcting you, after all.

nl 6y ago

> Media is supposed to be divisive. Do you mean "media is supposed to be diverse"? Because that's a goal which is commonly held to be good. I've literally never heard anyone say "Media is supposed to be divisive", nor heard the case for it. I'm going to assume that was a typo? For the record: Diverse: showing a great deal of variety; very different. Diversive: tending to cause disagreement or hostility between people.

moduspol 6y ago
I mean, probably, yes. What I mean is that if you are consuming news media and seeing only one point of view, something is wrong. I feel like I frequently see commenters who implicitly believe there's only one valid side to an issue, and the other side is just racism / bigotry / corruption. True, that's a call for diversity. But if you're seeing multiple perspectives butting heads consistently across the news media consumed by an entire country, that's divisive, as a result of having diverse perspectives and coverage. To your point, though, that's likely more the result of a lack of diversity at individual sources and people picking and choosing to consume less diverse news. "Divisive" isn't the right word.