4 ms·

The only research that has been done on this found that on Twitter the conservative voices were amplified more than progressive voices: https://www.washingtonp

The only research that has been done on this found that on Twitter the conservative voices were amplified more than progressive voices: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/twitter-amplifies-conservative-politicians/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/twitter-am...

trimethylpurine 4y ago
The opinion of three journalists working for the same retail tech conglomerate is hardly "research." WaPo has suffered a Pulitzer Prize revocation in 1981 for fabricating stories, has continuously circulated advertisements from China Watch (operated by the CCP), repeatedly settled on libelous claims made for profit, and on numerous occasions assisted in providing platforms for anti-Western and anti-Semitic groups supported by Iran. It's a joke to imagine they would do research in hopes of drawing any conclusion but the one that makes them the most money.
- themitigating 4y ago
  So have many other media outlets. It's an old company with many employees some of whom aren't going to be ethical. As for the Chinese government ads: do you want them to censor it?
  - trimethylpurine 4y ago
    You're too generous. It's all media, it's all for profit, and it's all unethical. No editor will willingly submit a piece that makes his/her company, or conglomerate overlords LESS money. That is, unless he/she plans to change careers. The circumstances imply that only the most submissive journalists, who are most willing to lie, are left in action.
- beachy 4y ago
  It would take some time to fact check your assertions, so I only looked into the first one. It involved a single reporter, not systemic plagiarism by the paper, and she was fired when it came to light. The Post's ombudsman, who handles readers' complaints as well as internal problems, undertook an investigation.
  - trimethylpurine 4y ago
    Wait, so you mean a bunch of wild assertions posted on the internet were in fact false? But I did research! Thanks for making my point.
- mikkergp 4y ago
  Really you had to go back to 1981?
  - trimethylpurine 4y ago
    Yeah, I guess I couldn't find any examples of journalism for profit since 1981. Or maybe, I chose an old example to make a point about how it's always been for profit.
mikkergp 4y ago
Interesting point, I guess I’m making the assertion that conservative ideas can spread better in small groups then liberal ideas since liberal ideas are trying to change the status quo they just have to plant a seed. Conservative ideas have to be fought for since “everyone already know them” (quotes for broad generalizations without data, but leaning into the fact that conservative ideas should be inherently more well known since they’ve been practiced in the past.)
- themitigating 4y ago
  So conservatives viewpoints spread in small groups better, a situation where you are less likely to be challenged and less likely to hear opposing viewpoints (because of the size)

trimethylpurine 4y ago

The opinion of three journalists working for the same retail tech conglomerate is hardly "research." WaPo has suffered a Pulitzer Prize revocation in 1981 for fabricating stories, has continuously circulated advertisements from China Watch (operated by the CCP), repeatedly settled on libelous claims made for profit, and on numerous occasions assisted in providing platforms for anti-Western and anti-Semitic groups supported by Iran. It's a joke to imagine they would do research in hopes of drawing any conclusion but the one that makes them the most money.

themitigating 4y ago
So have many other media outlets. It's an old company with many employees some of whom aren't going to be ethical. As for the Chinese government ads: do you want them to censor it?
- trimethylpurine 4y ago
  You're too generous. It's all media, it's all for profit, and it's all unethical. No editor will willingly submit a piece that makes his/her company, or conglomerate overlords LESS money. That is, unless he/she plans to change careers. The circumstances imply that only the most submissive journalists, who are most willing to lie, are left in action.
beachy 4y ago
It would take some time to fact check your assertions, so I only looked into the first one. It involved a single reporter, not systemic plagiarism by the paper, and she was fired when it came to light. The Post's ombudsman, who handles readers' complaints as well as internal problems, undertook an investigation.
- trimethylpurine 4y ago
  Wait, so you mean a bunch of wild assertions posted on the internet were in fact false? But I did research! Thanks for making my point.
mikkergp 4y ago
Really you had to go back to 1981?
- trimethylpurine 4y ago
  Yeah, I guess I couldn't find any examples of journalism for profit since 1981. Or maybe, I chose an old example to make a point about how it's always been for profit.

mikkergp 4y ago

Interesting point, I guess I’m making the assertion that conservative ideas can spread better in small groups then liberal ideas since liberal ideas are trying to change the status quo they just have to plant a seed. Conservative ideas have to be fought for since “everyone already know them” (quotes for broad generalizations without data, but leaning into the fact that conservative ideas should be inherently more well known since they’ve been practiced in the past.)

themitigating 4y ago
So conservatives viewpoints spread in small groups better, a situation where you are less likely to be challenged and less likely to hear opposing viewpoints (because of the size)