5 ms·

Ehh, I’ve got not particular stake in this conflict so it’s really interesting to see how each side is using propaganda and how obvious the propaganda is when y

by Retric 2y ago

Ehh, I’ve got not particular stake in this conflict so it’s really interesting to see how each side is using propaganda and how obvious the propaganda is when you’re not emotionally invested. Each side is using different tactics to fit the strength of their positions and how well various messages resonate. “They are the same anyway” is useful for a side who wants people to be inactive, it’s not some universal benefit to both parties. Instead each side wants different people to be engaged vs apathetic, which hardly unusual.

baq 2y ago
Both sides want their side engaged and the other apathetic. On a national level this means FSB employing hundreds if not thousands of people to troll political discourse in social media in the west to maximize the amount of ‘I don’t care anymore’ people. A very asymmetric setup exposing the underbelly of free speech cultures.
- logicchains 2y ago
  >A very asymmetric setup exposing the underbelly of free speech cultures As opposed to non-free-speech cultures like Russia and China where people have absolutely no say in whatever their leaders do? Because that's inevitably what happens when you give people in power the power to restrict speech: they restrict any speech critical of them. We're even seeing this in developed democracies like Germany where a journalist was recently fined for posting a meme online of a politician holding a sign saying "I hate free speech".
  - baq 2y ago
    Whataboutism does not change anything about it being a weak spot. I’m only saying the free speech west can’t use the same tactic against these kind of adversaries because they’re insulated against them.
    - Retric 2y ago
      Free speech including paid speech isn’t really a knock on free speech. Someone can be persuaded by an argument they heard once, but can’t per persuaded by an argument they never hear. Thus blocking speech by preventing any kind of speech including paid speech is problematic.
      - baq 2y ago
        I’m saying ‘free speech is an obvious weakness’, not ‘we should disallow free speech’. Very different things.
        Retric 2y ago
        Having outside actors in the conversation is a strength.
        monetus 2y ago
        The contention is that they in particular aren't good faith actors unlike other outside actors, iiuc.
        Retric 2y ago
        Bad faith actors are also beneficial. Kids who grow up watching commercials start distrusting them. Free speech is not about any one issue but all topics. In many ways curating so people see the kinds of things they agree with is vastly more harmful than propaganda.
        Braxton1980 2y ago
        What happens when people are tol 1. Don't trust the media 2. Don't trust the opposition 3. Don't trust the experts Doesn't this lead to a situation where only bad actors exist? It people are so savy because of advertising why did tens of millions believe the election was stolen?
  - netrus 2y ago
    It's important to be precise because everything is not the same. In the German case the ruling was not because someone posted a critical meme, but because it was not entirely obvious the picture was edited (as in: you and I can immediately see the photo was edited, but some people will not recognize the edit). I do not agree with the ruling, but as a citizen I am happy that in Germany we still care if claims are true or not (and try to prevent people from lying).
    - Whoppertime 2y ago
      Isn't that just relying on the stupidity of someone who may not exist? Like every single year people make the same dumb joke "Republicans vote on Tuesday and Democrats vote on Wednesday" leading to prosecution for misinformation when they cannot prove anyone actually tried voting on the wrong day because of the meme
      - Retric 2y ago
        Once you start talking millions of people someone will make that or any other mistake. The US has a higher threshold, but it’s clear those standards mean many people are duped by “obvious” lies. It’s kind of an arbitrary line, but ignoring the dumb feels like a mistake to me when dumb people are active in society, still vote, etc.
      - Braxton1980 2y ago
        Misinformation isnt
    - immibis 2y ago
      Does this happiness that some people care whether claims are true or not overrule the arrest and deportation of peaceful protestors, and people in general based on social media posts, or do you also feel happy about that?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Braxton1980 2y ago
  So. Maybe my experience but why are these bots and trolls always pushing messages that help the Republicans.
Braxton1980 2y ago
Are both sides doing all these things in equal amounts?
- Retric 2y ago
  No, they don’t have the same strengths but the net effect is similar.
  - Braxton1980 2y ago
    How can the net effect be similar if the actions aren't?
    - Retric 2y ago
      Their goals are similar. There’s lots of different ways of achieving similar ends. I’ve seen a lot more paid commercials from Israel side, but a lot more posts using Palestine’s side talking points. Same way you can build a wood or brick home, historically which people chose had a lot to do with local materials.
      - Braxton1980 2y ago
        >Their goals are similar. This isn't then your previous comment that the results are similar. Goals aren't nearly as important as results. Also, to dive deeper, what goals and how many are similar, and how similar? If you mean they are both supporting Israel, then yes, but the Democrats exert more control over their actions. For example Biden was limiting the bomb size that Israel could purchase and Trump removed that. So if you want to help the Palestinians one side is the better than the other. It doesn't matter if the goals are similar or even the results. There's still a difference and as you can see voter apathy only helped Republicans
        Retric 2y ago
        > If you mean they are both supporting Israel I have been talking about the propaganda from each sides of the current conflict in Palestine. I thought this make that clear “in this conflict so it’s really interesting to see how each side is using propaganda” but I may have misunderstood what you meant by supporting Israel. > This isn't then your previous comment that the results are similar. To be clear I’m noticing similar goals combined with something (diminishing returns?) yield similar results. Hell, it could also be a form follows function kind of thing, I’m noticing the results not doing a research paper. > what goals When I say they have similar goals I mean they are both trying to sway public option to support their agenda. There’s a bunch of different kinds of kind of propaganda. If one side was doing a call to action for their supporters like “Buy war bonds!” then I presume the results wouldn’t seem so similar.

by Retric 2y ago

baq 2y ago

Both sides want their side engaged and the other apathetic. On a national level this means FSB employing hundreds if not thousands of people to troll political discourse in social media in the west to maximize the amount of ‘I don’t care anymore’ people. A very asymmetric setup exposing the underbelly of free speech cultures.

logicchains 2y ago
>A very asymmetric setup exposing the underbelly of free speech cultures As opposed to non-free-speech cultures like Russia and China where people have absolutely no say in whatever their leaders do? Because that's inevitably what happens when you give people in power the power to restrict speech: they restrict any speech critical of them. We're even seeing this in developed democracies like Germany where a journalist was recently fined for posting a meme online of a politician holding a sign saying "I hate free speech".
- baq 2y ago
  Whataboutism does not change anything about it being a weak spot. I’m only saying the free speech west can’t use the same tactic against these kind of adversaries because they’re insulated against them.
  - Retric 2y ago
    Free speech including paid speech isn’t really a knock on free speech. Someone can be persuaded by an argument they heard once, but can’t per persuaded by an argument they never hear. Thus blocking speech by preventing any kind of speech including paid speech is problematic.
    - baq 2y ago
      I’m saying ‘free speech is an obvious weakness’, not ‘we should disallow free speech’. Very different things.
      - Retric 2y ago
        Having outside actors in the conversation is a strength.
        monetus 2y ago
        The contention is that they in particular aren't good faith actors unlike other outside actors, iiuc.
        Retric 2y ago
        Bad faith actors are also beneficial. Kids who grow up watching commercials start distrusting them. Free speech is not about any one issue but all topics. In many ways curating so people see the kinds of things they agree with is vastly more harmful than propaganda.
        Braxton1980 2y ago
        What happens when people are tol 1. Don't trust the media 2. Don't trust the opposition 3. Don't trust the experts Doesn't this lead to a situation where only bad actors exist? It people are so savy because of advertising why did tens of millions believe the election was stolen?
- netrus 2y ago
  It's important to be precise because everything is not the same. In the German case the ruling was not because someone posted a critical meme, but because it was not entirely obvious the picture was edited (as in: you and I can immediately see the photo was edited, but some people will not recognize the edit). I do not agree with the ruling, but as a citizen I am happy that in Germany we still care if claims are true or not (and try to prevent people from lying).
  - Whoppertime 2y ago
    Isn't that just relying on the stupidity of someone who may not exist? Like every single year people make the same dumb joke "Republicans vote on Tuesday and Democrats vote on Wednesday" leading to prosecution for misinformation when they cannot prove anyone actually tried voting on the wrong day because of the meme
    - Retric 2y ago
      Once you start talking millions of people someone will make that or any other mistake. The US has a higher threshold, but it’s clear those standards mean many people are duped by “obvious” lies. It’s kind of an arbitrary line, but ignoring the dumb feels like a mistake to me when dumb people are active in society, still vote, etc.
    - Braxton1980 2y ago
      Misinformation isnt
  - immibis 2y ago
    Does this happiness that some people care whether claims are true or not overrule the arrest and deportation of peaceful protestors, and people in general based on social media posts, or do you also feel happy about that?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Braxton1980 2y ago
So. Maybe my experience but why are these bots and trolls always pushing messages that help the Republicans.

Braxton1980 2y ago

Are both sides doing all these things in equal amounts?

Retric 2y ago
No, they don’t have the same strengths but the net effect is similar.
- Braxton1980 2y ago
  How can the net effect be similar if the actions aren't?
  - Retric 2y ago
    Their goals are similar. There’s lots of different ways of achieving similar ends. I’ve seen a lot more paid commercials from Israel side, but a lot more posts using Palestine’s side talking points. Same way you can build a wood or brick home, historically which people chose had a lot to do with local materials.
    - Braxton1980 2y ago
      >Their goals are similar. This isn't then your previous comment that the results are similar. Goals aren't nearly as important as results. Also, to dive deeper, what goals and how many are similar, and how similar? If you mean they are both supporting Israel, then yes, but the Democrats exert more control over their actions. For example Biden was limiting the bomb size that Israel could purchase and Trump removed that. So if you want to help the Palestinians one side is the better than the other. It doesn't matter if the goals are similar or even the results. There's still a difference and as you can see voter apathy only helped Republicans
      - Retric 2y ago
        > If you mean they are both supporting Israel I have been talking about the propaganda from each sides of the current conflict in Palestine. I thought this make that clear “in this conflict so it’s really interesting to see how each side is using propaganda” but I may have misunderstood what you meant by supporting Israel. > This isn't then your previous comment that the results are similar. To be clear I’m noticing similar goals combined with something (diminishing returns?) yield similar results. Hell, it could also be a form follows function kind of thing, I’m noticing the results not doing a research paper. > what goals When I say they have similar goals I mean they are both trying to sway public option to support their agenda. There’s a bunch of different kinds of kind of propaganda. If one side was doing a call to action for their supporters like “Buy war bonds!” then I presume the results wouldn’t seem so similar.