5 ms·

>including facts

• parthdesai 8mo ago
  > deliberate, systematic manipulation of information And, what are we doing with those facts? We're manipulating them lol
  • fc417fc802 8mo ago
    It's using information to influence public opinion in a calculated manner. Said information can include facts. It can even be entirely factual. Manipulating the feed of a social media website for the purpose of swaying the viewer's opinion is a cut and dry example of propaganda. Doesn't matter who does it or whether the information displayed is factual or not. Those things make zero difference.
    • johnnyanmac 8mo ago
      This really doesn't pass the sniff test. It reminds me of a recent post I saw: "what are movies people like only becsuse it is good?", calling it "quality slop". It's contradictory. If people are given a wide perspective of a situation and adjusts bias for the Overton window (aka, we don't let Nazis have an equal platform to a more progressive group), then we just call that good reporting. The act of convincing people isn't inherently a bad thing. How you do it matters a lot.
      • fc417fc802 8mo ago
        You're subtly misattributing me though. "Convincing someone" is a superset which contains intentional manipulation of the information someone is exposed to but also lots of other things. As you said, how you do it matters a lot. You've also gone and (IIUC) equated the general biases of an outlet with propaganda which I certainly wouldn't agree with. They're similar, and the former can certainly morph into the latter, but they aren't the same thing.
      • direwolf20 8mo ago
        GP is saying people aren't given a wide perspective of a situation
  • Cthulhu_ 8mo ago
    That can be part of it, but usually it's not necessary - certain facts, or certain aspects of facts (e.g. exclude some context) can just get exaggerated to have the desired effect on a larger population.