|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 9, 2021 18:41:40 GMT -8
Academics and technology experts want President Biden to appoint a “reality czar” and a “truth commission” to mitigate the threat of domestic extremists and the spread of conspiracy theories.
A piece by The New York Times titled “How the Biden Administration Can Help Solve Our Reality Crisis” includes experts from Harvard University, Stanford, the University of Maryland, and other organizations with their take on how best to handle “hoaxes, lies and collective delusions.”
 What if they're perpetrated by the media? At this point, judging by the politicization we've seen in nearly every single field (media / science / public discourse etc) I just don't know how you would possibly vet anyone not to be biased.
Even some of the strongest and most prominent sources that people have used for unbiased journalism through the years are now obviously biased. Many people like to use the WSJ as an example, but that paper is obviously left leaning judging by how their articles are framed and Bezos' own personal biases.
I tend to now gravitate most towards independent people who don't have allegiance to any one paper, who seem to get under the skin of their peers and who have a history of being brutally honest even when they have much to lose.
If there's one thing I've learned, it's that when someone is on the right track of a story then the real venom comes out and there is hell to pay by those that don't want the story to get out.
I wish Glen Greenwald wrote more!  |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 9, 2021 18:56:06 GMT -8
You don't find it disconcerting that there will be a government organization that would be dictating what you can and can't say? It's a system that is far more ripe for abuse than the opposite, which is basically just the freedom to grapple opposing ideas in open discourse.
In concept, it's everything Western society has opposed in the name of democracy.
There is just no way that this ends well IMO.
Where are these reports saying that a government organization will dictate what I (or someone) can or cannot say? I’m really not seeing that.  There are several things to consider here.
1) the article I linked is about censoring misinformation to limit extremism in much the same way Twitter, Parler and Facebook have all be limited. There is NO way that censoring ends well. That's basically a near God given principle that the West was founded on.
2) the discussion we've had on here of what is and isn't domestic 'extremism' or domestic terrorism as used in other media is important. It seems that anybody who thought Trump won the election is a domestic terrorist or extremist, but i have a LOT of pro Trump family and friends and they ALL think Trump one the election. I would venture to say that millions of people believe this. Does that make millions of people extremists or terrorists?
3) Isn't it convenient that one side gets to dictate what the other side can say? That's not how democracy works. A Democrat president can't decide which Republican supporters are extremists?
4) The problem is a 'left vs right' problem. You don't solve that problem by making the right more guilty. 
Unless I misunderstood the article, this is what I'm seeing.
EDITED: to say that I may have been looking through this article with political lenses. It may actually be about misinformation that is non-political (like Covid misinformation) as well as political stuff.
|
|
parker1865
TCBF Member
Joined: September 2018
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by parker1865 on Feb 10, 2021 10:38:53 GMT -8
steve, i am always glad to have a conversation of interest. what i am not interested in, is assumptions that i was personally attacking you. it seems that when you respond to my rmarks, you do so from a bent of disgust and insinuations that i am in some manner belittling you. I’m not now, or previously “disgusted”. Maybe frustrated is accurate in some places. I never thought you were attacking me, only that I wasn’t able to properly understand or interpret the article due to your words seeking to clarify or define my POV. No preconceived notions. I use “outrage” in the hyperbolic sense that I would find disfavor with the article in some way. Of course I’ve heard of The NY Times. I thought it was silly you asked/suggested that. I thought my answer was equally silly by responding with the papers I read being ones mostly being notable for their sensationalism and low standard of journalism. The Village Voice pages found on subways I included to add a bit more silliness to my response. I’m not a student of the origins and history of major American news publishers, but I probably know some basics. Not trying to redirect the conversation. I do apologize if I seemed snarky, and doubly so if the snarkiess dripped. This is not my approach or style. I don’t mock, tease, or belittle anyone as a matter of course, and principle. You may occasionally catch me referring to someone as a “goofball”, but that’s as harsh as I get. There was no false posturing, or even real posturing. I don’t understand what I’m supposed to take from that article that evidently you and Vintage do. The “insincere please”, was anything but that. I added “please” so I didn’t sound like a demanding jerk. Nothing was designed to embarrass. If anything, I’m embarrassed to get to this point, being that I don’t seem to grasp the point or subtext to the article, and that I’ve made myself out to appear snarky or dismissive I’m not offended, but completely confused about the “guilt card” thing. I’m lost there. I though the ancestry thing was odd to bring up relative to my my understanding or opinion of the article. I mentioned it to Vintage as I wasn’t sure how “czar” might be used in Canada. I wasn’t sure how common the slang use was outside the U.S. That all. Fwiw, I suppose I’m only 4th generation American, with Great Grandparents being born in the States. There’s no feigned indignity. I have no desire to start arguments. I don’t know what you mean with “phony guilt bashing” or deliberately misinterpreting anything. I’m not judging anyone for anything here. If the theme is “journalism”, fine. I can read things through that lens, but I’m not sure where this article was particularly egregious, or what makes it stand out from any dozen others from the same source on a given day. Nothing was designed to belittle or be contentious. The bolded part struck me as it seemed as though the language was found too sensationalist on one hand but then not so much on the other? I think we’re really having a discussion that somehow splintered into two separate directions and I’m not understanding where you’re going and vice versa. As for my “less ado” comment, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. You saw it as discourteous and implying ignorance, which frankly I’m horrified at. My intent was to end on a note of levity, even being slightly self-deprecating. I can’t see where the article raised anyone’s attention the way it has, but I could stand a bit less excitement or sensationalism in my own day as spending just 15 minutes flipping around tv channels or following internet news links can make my head spin due to all the fussing and finger-pointing. I never gave a thought to Shakespeare. I just thought it sounded kind of funny. “Too much ado in my day.” The alliteration had a cute novelty to it, to my ears. I’m truly sorry that I came across in such a vulgar or crass manner. None of that is “me”, how I think or feel about anyone. I don’t take tomorrow for granted, and I don’t burn bridges. i understand, steve. and, for future reference, if we do converse, my name is john, and if you want to address me by first name, that is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2021 14:57:45 GMT -8
As Jurassic Park stated, 'life always finds a way' and politicians are starting to push back on the censorship tide that started in our universities years ago and are now starting to make their way into mainstream media and society's every day places.
If noticed many politicians starting to push back against this including Governor DeSantis and the Premiere of Quebec (among others)
For anyone that DOESN'T think this current movement of censorship and cancel culture is a problem, this may be the single largest problem we face in the West socially.
I remember about 5 or 6 years ago when news started breaking out about conflicts in universities about this I thought 'well, the universities will solve this. They'll never allow it to get too far."
It turns out that the universities are the root problem in most cases.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2021 20:51:43 GMT -8
I know that in North America the complaints about social media censorship are primarily seen as a Republican complaint but it's happening in all corners of the world. Canada, Europe, Australia.
Just came across this.
Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro announced a legal initiative on Thursday aimed at enabling internet users to file complaints against the removal of online posts as well as the creation of a special court for freedom of speech.
Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro said the aim of the bill was to give internet users the feeling that their rights are protected and that their posts cannot be arbitrarily removed from online platforms.
The full name of the bill is the law on freedom of expressing one's own views and searching and disseminating information on the internet.
Under its provisions, social media services will not be allowed to remove content or block accounts if the content on them does not break Polish law. In the event of removal or blockage, a complaint can be sent to the platform, which will have 24 hours to consider it. Within 48 hours of the decision, the user will be able to file a petition to the court for the return of access. The court will consider complaints within seven days of receipt and the entire process is to be electronic.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2021 23:51:12 GMT -8
It looks like Parler is back.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 16, 2021 22:52:19 GMT -8
A spectacular and thorough article that I posted elsewhere on this forum about the gaslighting surrounding the Capitol Hill protests of Jan 6.
|
|
|
|
Post by TupennyConan on Feb 17, 2021 4:48:16 GMT -8
I know GG from occasional glimpses at cable news over the years but have never read him until this post. The article is spectacular, agreed. The attacks you suffer over on the CGC Boards for false & misleading conspiratorial claims could more productively redirect over there to the false and misleading conspiratorial claims across all levels of our society, including the White House, this article exposes [if the subject were allowed], but I believe personal politics and the personal desire for revenge, power & control, & a needy sense of authority & moral superiority, so motivates our educated class that we can all doubt with ease the emergence of any such attacks. In the meantime, they express their impotent aggressions by treating you as their punching bag. Rather than challenging your claims with dispassionate intelligence, they condemn your character in the foulest terms, entirely to their discredit. The merits of their positions, which are many, suffer or become lost in the process. The loudest voices on the CGC Boards, while often correct on the substance, come from the least human of folks. If the test is likability, they fail. Which is also spectacular, though in a different way than just mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by TupennyConan on Feb 17, 2021 4:50:13 GMT -8
I haven't any idea where the italics came from but I like them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Feb 17, 2021 6:08:40 GMT -8
I haven't any idea where the italics came from but I like them. Yes they have that 1950s War Comic look to them  |
|
|
|
Post by TupennyConan on Feb 17, 2021 6:58:03 GMT -8
Thanks. I was too busy keyboard pounding personal attacks against the CGC Boards' educated class to notice, I reckon.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 17, 2021 7:36:22 GMT -8
I know GG from occasional glimpses at cable news over the years but have never read him until this post. The article is spectacular, agreed. The attacks you suffer over on the CGC Boards for false & misleading conspiratorial claims could more productively redirect over there to the false and misleading conspiratorial claims across all levels of our society, including the White House, this article exposes [if the subject were allowed], but I believe personal politics and the personal desire for revenge, power & control, & a needy sense of authority & moral superiority, so motivates our educated class that we can all doubt with ease the emergence of any such attacks. In the meantime, they express their impotent aggressions by treating you as their punching bag. Rather than challenging your claims with dispassionate intelligence, they condemn your character in the foulest terms, entirely to their discredit. The merits of their positions, which are many, suffer or become lost in the process. The loudest voices on the CGC Boards, while often correct on the substance, come from the least human of folks. If the test is likability, they fail. Which is also spectacular, though in a different way than just mentioned. Thanks I appreciate that and I agree with the point you raise about all of us being more productive.
I'd much rather expend efforts having great discussions and learning new things but I seem to expend more than half my effort just trying to defend myself over there from petty people which is a colossal waste of resources for everyone.
But I have a clean conscience and accept whatever happens as being 'meant to be'. Just would be nice if ONE of them ever admitted they were wrong.
I subscribe to GG's newsletters, which is free and everything I read by him is done with the same thoroughness and raw energy.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 17, 2021 7:53:31 GMT -8
I'm also going to add that if EVERYONE stood up and opposed the hypocrisy and personal attacks that people dish out the way a select few have then they wouldn't do it anymore.
It's just mob bullying and they foment and are empowered when there is little opposition in much the same way a mob in public does. I've noticed a pattern and that pattern is that as soon as a few people stand up in opposition, the bullying quiets down pretty quickly.
That's a lesson for everyone to not be afraid and to stand up for what is right.
I thought this was a great article about standing up to cancel culture.
|
|
|
|
Post by barry on Feb 17, 2021 8:39:16 GMT -8
A spectacular and thorough article that I posted elsewhere on this forum about the gaslighting surrounding the Capitol Hill protests of Jan 6.
Under pressure, the New York Times has finally retracted its false story about Sicknick. |
|
parker1865
TCBF Member
Joined: September 2018
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by parker1865 on Feb 17, 2021 9:10:35 GMT -8
I haven't any idea where the italics came from but I like them. how do you feel about no caps?  |
|
What if they're perpetrated by the media?
he endures, or because i defend myself from the banned member 
