5 ms·

It's not really weird, it's expected. What would be weird is if the HN crowd was able to think for themselves when the media, all governments, and tech companie

It's not really weird, it's expected. What would be weird is if the HN crowd was able to think for themselves when the media, all governments, and tech companies are pushing the same narrative. Employees of tech companies aren't any different than employees of non-tech companies, their main trait is following orders.

eutropia 6y ago
"Pushing a narrative" is a pretty hilarious way to put it when you also say "the media, all governments, and tech companies" were the ones doing it. It implies a conspiracy to paint the picture differently than it was, which seems like an audaciously high bar of scrutiny to pass when it unfolded live. Could it also be that everyone just reported what they saw? And could it be that what everyone saw was the President of the US tell his fervent supporters to march to the Capitol and "not be weak"? And that such supporters posted videos of themselves committing crimes in the name of a conspiracy theory which is been more thoroughly debunked than any in modern history? I'm almost afraid to ask what the competing narrative (the one being covered up or bulldozed by the popular one being 'pushed') could be.
- another_sock 6y ago
  You're not afraid to ask what the competing narrative is though, because you have all the institutions pushing the dominant narrative on your side. Enjoy this!
  - eutropia 6y ago
    I'll just ask then: what's the other side? what is "my" side? why would "all the institutions" push one side versus the other? You're essentially just insinuating a conspiracy without providing a valid alternative to consider. Be substantive.
    - another_sock 6y ago
      I'm not insinuating anything lmao. You are adding a bunch of loaded terms like conspiracy because you can't just enjoy the position you are in. Again, enjoy it while you have it!
- pessimizer 6y ago
  Every newsreader was speaking in very emotional terms about this "shameful attack on democracy." It's fine to express emotions - but these were people reading words that were written for them from a teleprompter. It was a bunch of institutions that agree with each other and enjoy the status quo saying predictable things about things that threaten the routine. It was not a bunch of random people spontaneously agreeing with each other. Is there a word for a not-conspiracy theory? A word for when supporters of powerful institutions insist that no one has ever coordinated with anyone else, that massive intelligence agencies with budgets in the billions don't do anything, and that if nobody openly talked about it in an email, it didn't happen?
  - mistermann 6y ago
    That would be a Coincidence Theory I think. It is weird how no one can notice that most journalists have essentially the same interpretation of this freak show, and the same forced tone of reverence, but as soon as you step outside of the formal narrative, interpretations are all over the map. Would this be the Overton Window being projected perhaps? It's weird, whatever it is.
    - debaserab2 6y ago
      Why would it be weird? Is there an alternate perspective where the nation's capitol wasn't ransacked by a hostile mob? What other interpretations are you imagining would be reported?
      - mistermann 6y ago
        I guess, maybe it isn't that weird, maybe that's just how people are. There is very little diversity of thought or ability to see multiple dimensions in the general public, so why should I expect it in journalism (well, it's supposed to be their job, but that's obviously old fashioned). > Why would it be weird? Is there an alternate perspective where the nation's capitol wasn't ransacked by a hostile mob? What other interpretations are you imagining would be reported? This is an example of the above. You see this event as: "The nation's capitol was ransacked by a hostile mob." There is so much more to this story, so many obvious (to me) questions, and even other details in the coordinated narrative running in the media. Yet here you are, rhetorically representing that a "mob" "ransacking the capital" is all there is to it. And it's not just you, this sort of obvious(?) distortion of reality is becoming extremely common in culture war threads. I point it out regularly, and I've never had a single person touch the topic. Either they will reply but completely dodge the question as if they didn't see it, or they will say asking such questions are absurd or inappropriate, or simply not reply. To me, this mass change in the ~"collective consciousness" of the population is completely fascinating.

eutropia 6y ago

"Pushing a narrative" is a pretty hilarious way to put it when you also say "the media, all governments, and tech companies" were the ones doing it. It implies a conspiracy to paint the picture differently than it was, which seems like an audaciously high bar of scrutiny to pass when it unfolded live. Could it also be that everyone just reported what they saw? And could it be that what everyone saw was the President of the US tell his fervent supporters to march to the Capitol and "not be weak"? And that such supporters posted videos of themselves committing crimes in the name of a conspiracy theory which is been more thoroughly debunked than any in modern history? I'm almost afraid to ask what the competing narrative (the one being covered up or bulldozed by the popular one being 'pushed') could be.

another_sock 6y ago
You're not afraid to ask what the competing narrative is though, because you have all the institutions pushing the dominant narrative on your side. Enjoy this!
- eutropia 6y ago
  I'll just ask then: what's the other side? what is "my" side? why would "all the institutions" push one side versus the other? You're essentially just insinuating a conspiracy without providing a valid alternative to consider. Be substantive.
  - another_sock 6y ago
    I'm not insinuating anything lmao. You are adding a bunch of loaded terms like conspiracy because you can't just enjoy the position you are in. Again, enjoy it while you have it!
pessimizer 6y ago
Every newsreader was speaking in very emotional terms about this "shameful attack on democracy." It's fine to express emotions - but these were people reading words that were written for them from a teleprompter. It was a bunch of institutions that agree with each other and enjoy the status quo saying predictable things about things that threaten the routine. It was not a bunch of random people spontaneously agreeing with each other. Is there a word for a not-conspiracy theory? A word for when supporters of powerful institutions insist that no one has ever coordinated with anyone else, that massive intelligence agencies with budgets in the billions don't do anything, and that if nobody openly talked about it in an email, it didn't happen?
- mistermann 6y ago
  That would be a Coincidence Theory I think. It is weird how no one can notice that most journalists have essentially the same interpretation of this freak show, and the same forced tone of reverence, but as soon as you step outside of the formal narrative, interpretations are all over the map. Would this be the Overton Window being projected perhaps? It's weird, whatever it is.
  - debaserab2 6y ago
    Why would it be weird? Is there an alternate perspective where the nation's capitol wasn't ransacked by a hostile mob? What other interpretations are you imagining would be reported?
    - mistermann 6y ago
      I guess, maybe it isn't that weird, maybe that's just how people are. There is very little diversity of thought or ability to see multiple dimensions in the general public, so why should I expect it in journalism (well, it's supposed to be their job, but that's obviously old fashioned). > Why would it be weird? Is there an alternate perspective where the nation's capitol wasn't ransacked by a hostile mob? What other interpretations are you imagining would be reported? This is an example of the above. You see this event as: "The nation's capitol was ransacked by a hostile mob." There is so much more to this story, so many obvious (to me) questions, and even other details in the coordinated narrative running in the media. Yet here you are, rhetorically representing that a "mob" "ransacking the capital" is all there is to it. And it's not just you, this sort of obvious(?) distortion of reality is becoming extremely common in culture war threads. I point it out regularly, and I've never had a single person touch the topic. Either they will reply but completely dodge the question as if they didn't see it, or they will say asking such questions are absurd or inappropriate, or simply not reply. To me, this mass change in the ~"collective consciousness" of the population is completely fascinating.