7 ms·
Mask off time. I wonder how @dang will handle egregious racism disguised as "data".
by prions 5y ago
Mask off time. I wonder how @dang will handle egregious racism disguised as "data".
- benmmurphy 5y agoThe article is just lazy journalism. There are a lot of possible alternatives variables to run a regression on that could have stronger explanatory power and they just chose the first that fit the narrative they wanted to present. Southern states and the legacy of racism looks like a viable explanation for the higher murder rates in 'Red' states that should have been explored as part of the article.
- Grieving 5y agoWhat's the difference between egregious racism disguised as "data" and data relating to race that contradicts liberal priors?
- happytoexplain 5y agoThe difference is contextual, as with anything. The parent obviously disagrees that the data provided rebuts the article's content (I too disagree, and think it mostly only serves to spur hatred in this particular context, the same way the title of the article does).
- benmmurphy 5y ago13/52 is a known hate symbol: https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/1352-1390 https://www.adl.org/education/references/hate-symbols/1352-1...
- legalcorrection 5y agoIt’s literally a crime statistic that’s true.
- happytoexplain 5y agoLots of propaganda and hate-bait is true. Context is what matters in those cases. I agree that the parent is making an incorrect implication though, but not for the reason you give.
- wolverine876 5y agoFirst, that's irrelevant. Second, all we have is your claim. We do have a citation that it's hate speech.
- emerged 5y agoIs there literally a single thing which you couldn’t cite as hate speech in 2022?
- wolverine876 5y agoWhile that is a common response, it doesn't address the problem or make any specfic claim. Are you saying there is no hate speech? We shouldn't do anything about hate speech? Make a claim here.
- happytoexplain 5y agoThis is weak. Yes, these numbers can be (and usually are) used as emotion-targeting propaganda. However, assuming they are true in a reasonably non-cherry-picked context, the prevalence of dishonest usage then does not disqualify them from being used in a useful context, free from hatred. Your post implies otherwise, though (regardless of whether they are or are not being used that way in the particular case of the OP).
- legalcorrection 5y ago
- giantg2 5y agoCan data actually be racist? Or just the way we use it (information we form from it)?
- emerged 5y agoI’d argue that pointing at a user and calling them racist is quite egregious.