4 ms·

I don't know what the right answer for the media outlets is here; if they didn't report on things like this, the contingent that are constantly shouting that "t

I don't know what the right answer for the media outlets is here; if they didn't report on things like this, the contingent that are constantly shouting that "the main-stream media is hiding the truth from you" would get louder and have another bit of real evidence to underpin their conspiracy theories.

simonh 4y ago
Given the choice between more deaths and noisier crazies, well, you don't have to listen to the crazies. Except when they get elected, I suppose.
- arminiusreturns 4y ago
  I like how you jump directly to crazy from gp's "contigent of people saying the media is hiding the truth". Do you see how your response is part of the problem? Instead of addressing issues brought up, its just a label slap and then dismissal. Yeah there are real crazies who also say those things, but they are dwarfed by the amount of normal people who don't trust media and with many good reasons. I have a feeling it was the mention of "conspiracy theories" having a modern intellectual connotation of ridiculous, but its a shame because conspiracy is a legal term and it happens all the time, and there is a lot of good analysis left on the chopping block due to mere association with similar sounding phrases and conspiracy theorists being enough to shut down thought on the matter.
  - simonh 4y ago
    >contigent of people saying the media is hiding the truth Go start a media organisation, publish, go on social media, bring the truth to the people. Nobody will stop you. That's all just tosh. When I was a teenager here in the UK I used to be able to buy the English edition of Pravda in my local newsagents. In fact you can read the latest edition right now [0], thought it's a lot less risible these days. Yes news organisations often have an agenda, but they're all different agendas and doing a complete end run around them has never been easier. Don't trust them. Do your own thing. The whole hiding the truth meme isn't even CS bull anymore, it's just stupid. The free world is awash with every conceivable opinion. [0] https://english.pravda.ru/ https://english.pravda.ru/
    - arminiusreturns 4y ago
      None of that negates the truth that the media that has the most minds in it's capture hides the truth more often than not. Yes, the internet is a last bastion of anarchistic freedom of thought, which is why it also is under fierce attack by the oligarchs. There are a handful of true journalists and truth tellers on the internet, and their truth no matter how powerful generally gets shutdown and prevented from reaching the minds of others. On top of that recently there have been moves to regulate speech against the principles of freedom of speech. The very purveyors of disinfo are now claiming a right to govern disinfo. Alarm bells should be going off for everyone. Class war is at play, and the non-.001% are losing.
      - simonh 4y ago
        Or maybe. Just maybe, the vast majority of people don’t see it that way, and genuinely don’t care about and don’t want to read or hear about the kind of fringe stuff you think is being ‘suppressed’.
Karellen 4y ago
I suppose that they could have something like the "some asshole" initiative[0], where they can report that a thing happened, and provide historical perspective and statistical analysis, but without identifying who carried out the attack, or what their motives were, or even who the victim(s) were other than "a fortune 500 CEO", or "a regional business owner". They wouldn't be hiding any information. They'd still be reporting that the thing happened. A record of who died is still going to be available in the obituaries, or public FAA reports. The media just don't have to publicise the specific details that tend to inspire copycats. ...but they'd get fewer clicks/views, so it'll never happen :-( [0] http://nonadventures.com/2015/06/20/the-some-of-all-fears/ http://nonadventures.com/2015/06/20/the-some-of-all-fears/

simonh 4y ago

Given the choice between more deaths and noisier crazies, well, you don't have to listen to the crazies. Except when they get elected, I suppose.

arminiusreturns 4y ago
I like how you jump directly to crazy from gp's "contigent of people saying the media is hiding the truth". Do you see how your response is part of the problem? Instead of addressing issues brought up, its just a label slap and then dismissal. Yeah there are real crazies who also say those things, but they are dwarfed by the amount of normal people who don't trust media and with many good reasons. I have a feeling it was the mention of "conspiracy theories" having a modern intellectual connotation of ridiculous, but its a shame because conspiracy is a legal term and it happens all the time, and there is a lot of good analysis left on the chopping block due to mere association with similar sounding phrases and conspiracy theorists being enough to shut down thought on the matter.
- simonh 4y ago
  >contigent of people saying the media is hiding the truth Go start a media organisation, publish, go on social media, bring the truth to the people. Nobody will stop you. That's all just tosh. When I was a teenager here in the UK I used to be able to buy the English edition of Pravda in my local newsagents. In fact you can read the latest edition right now [0], thought it's a lot less risible these days. Yes news organisations often have an agenda, but they're all different agendas and doing a complete end run around them has never been easier. Don't trust them. Do your own thing. The whole hiding the truth meme isn't even CS bull anymore, it's just stupid. The free world is awash with every conceivable opinion. [0] https://english.pravda.ru/ https://english.pravda.ru/
  - arminiusreturns 4y ago
    None of that negates the truth that the media that has the most minds in it's capture hides the truth more often than not. Yes, the internet is a last bastion of anarchistic freedom of thought, which is why it also is under fierce attack by the oligarchs. There are a handful of true journalists and truth tellers on the internet, and their truth no matter how powerful generally gets shutdown and prevented from reaching the minds of others. On top of that recently there have been moves to regulate speech against the principles of freedom of speech. The very purveyors of disinfo are now claiming a right to govern disinfo. Alarm bells should be going off for everyone. Class war is at play, and the non-.001% are losing.
    - simonh 4y ago
      Or maybe. Just maybe, the vast majority of people don’t see it that way, and genuinely don’t care about and don’t want to read or hear about the kind of fringe stuff you think is being ‘suppressed’.

Karellen 4y ago

I suppose that they could have something like the "some asshole" initiative[0], where they can report that a thing happened, and provide historical perspective and statistical analysis, but without identifying who carried out the attack, or what their motives were, or even who the victim(s) were other than "a fortune 500 CEO", or "a regional business owner". They wouldn't be hiding any information. They'd still be reporting that the thing happened. A record of who died is still going to be available in the obituaries, or public FAA reports. The media just don't have to publicise the specific details that tend to inspire copycats. ...but they'd get fewer clicks/views, so it'll never happen :-( [0] http://nonadventures.com/2015/06/20/the-some-of-all-fears/ http://nonadventures.com/2015/06/20/the-some-of-all-fears/