Misinformation is the biggest threat to our democracy.
posted by SpockMisinformation is the biggest threat to our democracy.
I'd argue it's the tribalism (which makes us not care about factual information) and the inability to have a civil discussion on the topic while disagreeing fervently.
posted by O-TrapI'd argue it's the tribalism (which makes us not care about factual information) and the inability to have a civil discussion on the topic while disagreeing fervently.
misinformation from the media is what is driving the prevalence of tribalism
posted by Spockmisinformation from the media is what is driving the prevalence of tribalism
See, I think it's the other way around, and I'll tell you why.
News networks are, first and foremost, businesses. If there's not enough money to keep the lights on and the ownership happy, no information is going to get passed along.
As such, to some degree, the media outlets have an organic motivation for appealing to their target audience.
Now, if any significant subset of the population wanted the objective, unadulterated, Joe-Friday-style news, there'd be a market for a media outlet to provide that.
If there's a market for it, then there's money to be made with it, so a media outlet would fill that niche, whether it'd be a new one or whether one or more of the existing ones would transition in that direction.
However, the media outlets are really only becoming more polarized. That tells me that it's what the audiences want. There's a demand for media that agrees with them.
The market is just catering to the demand, same as it does in every other industry.
posted by Spockmisinformation from the media is what is driving the prevalence of tribalism
Since you post links to Breitbart, you're driving said prevalence, then.
posted by O-TrapSee, I think it's the other way around, and I'll tell you why.
News networks are, first and foremost, businesses. If there's not enough money to keep the lights on and the ownership happy, no information is going to get passed along.
As such, to some degree, the media outlets have an organic motivation for appealing to their target audience.
Now, if any significant subset of the population wanted the objective, unadulterated, Joe-Friday-style news, there'd be a market for a media outlet to provide that.
If there's a market for it, then there's money to be made with it, so a media outlet would fill that niche, whether it'd be a new one or whether one or more of the existing ones would transition in that direction.
However, the media outlets are really only becoming more polarized. That tells me that it's what the audiences want. There's a demand for media that agrees with them.
The market is just catering to the demand, same as it does in every other industry.
Because of the ‘information age’ and access to it, I think it is millions of people finally realizing that there is a whole lot of information that the MSM withholds/edits/skews, and so for about half the population trust has been completely lost. In short, the corrupt media drove millions to Fox News and elsewhere.
posted by majorsparkLOL at people in New York City who don't want to pay $2.75 to ride the subway.
While the protests are idiotic and unnecessary....
The underlying thoughts are true. The MTA subway system is trash and at least a decade behind other similar cities. I still prefer $127 a month over dealing with a car anyday.
posted by AutomatikWhile the protests are idiotic and unnecessary....
The underlying thoughts are true. The MTA subway system is trash and at least a decade behind other similar cities. I still prefer $127 a month over dealing with a car anyday.
Still 10000x better than DC and Napoli.
posted by QuakerOatsBecause of the ‘information age’ and access to it, I think it is millions of people finally realizing that there is a whole lot of information that the MSM withholds/edits/skews, and so for about half the population trust has been completely lost. In short, the corrupt media drove millions to Fox News and elsewhere.
Oh, I don't think so. The slant began before the advent of the Internet in its current, accessible iteration. People wanted "news" echo chambers before they ever distrusted the sources to this degree.
And I love that you think Fox News isn't part of that corrupt bunch. Gotta give you credit for the blind partisan consistency. That takes talent.
posted by O-Trap
And I love that you think Fox News isn't part of that corrupt bunch. Gotta give you credit for the blind partisan consistency. That takes talent.
I think the straight Fox folks are just about the only trustworthy people out there. Their opinion shows are pure propaganda, but the other networks are 24/7 Dem propaganda.
Happened to watch some Fox Business tonight, and I couldn't believe that it's almost as bad as Hannity and Tucker. Kennedy has a show - and she's Libertarian and a "never-Trumper"....but it looked like she was reading a script from Hannity.
posted by O-TrapOh, I don't think so. The slant began before the advent of the Internet in its current, accessible iteration. People wanted "news" echo chambers before they ever distrusted the sources to this degree.
And I love that you think Fox News isn't part of that corrupt bunch. Gotta give you credit for the blind partisan consistency. That takes talent.
LOL
Wasn't sure where else to put this, but it brought the lulz.
https://www.facebook.com/ComedyCentral/videos/272518920353988/
The lefts new target...Bill Gates. He should have to give up $100B of his money to the shitty government? And they don’t realize that net worth isn’t all liquid.
posted by iclfan2The lefts new target...Bill Gates. He should have to give up $100B of his money to the shitty government? And they don’t realize that net worth isn’t all liquid.
The government spends 4.1T, but if they spent 4.2 instead, all of our problems would be solved.
posted by iclfan2The lefts new target...Bill Gates. He should have to give up $100B of his money to the shitty government? And they don’t realize that net worth isn’t all liquid.
And tens of millions of Americans have pension and 401k money in the stocks of corporations....Elizabeth Warren basically wants to take your money and spend it for you as she sees fit.
So apparently ABC called up CBS and complained their former employee leaked that tape, and so CBS fired her? Is that because of solidarity, or simply that so much shady shit is taking place in the so-called media that you send the message whistleblowers will be blackballed? On the one hand, I understand no company wants people airing dirty laundry, and even if it hurts a competitor you don't can't trust that person. On the other hand, it's kind of your frickin' job as a journalist to expose that kind of stuff.
And, anyway, she apparently didn't do it. Terminated with no chance to plead her case. Should make for an interesting lawsuit, I imagine.
Oakland residents, merchants reach breaking point amid rampant homelessness, crime
Venezuela
California-style
posted by QuakerOats
Oakland residents, merchants reach breaking point amid rampant homelessness, crime
- San Francisco's new DA pledges not to prosecute public urination, other quality-of-life-crimes
- Tom Del Beccaro on San Francisco's new district attorney: 'The city is going much farther left'
Venezuela
California-style
Yet, a citizen is cited for eating a sandwich on a train platform because it is against the law......
What a screwed up place......
https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/11/us/bart-san-francisco-man-detained-sandwich/index.html
never going to or living in any big city
posted by Spocknever going to or living in any big city
You will, or you will be shamed!
“I unironically embrace the bashing of rural Americans. They, as a group, are bad people who have made bad life decisions. Some, I assume are good people. But this nostalgia for some imagined pastoral way of life is stupid and we should shame people who aren’t pro-city,” he wrote in a since-deleted tweet. --
Cal prof.
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13975
I don’t see all of this bullshit ending well ………………for the radical left.
posted by QuakerOatsYou will, or you will be shamed!
“I unironically embrace the bashing of rural Americans. They, as a group, are bad people who have made bad life decisions. Some, I assume are good people. But this nostalgia for some imagined pastoral way of life is stupid and we should shame people who aren’t pro-city,” he wrote in a since-deleted tweet. --
Cal prof.
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13975
I don’t see all of this bullshit ending well ………………for the radical left.
I live in the limits of a city with a couple hundred thousand people. I'm hugely pro-city.
And that grad instructor is indicating that he has authority on a demographic of which he isn't a part and can make broad sweeping generalizations about it.
What a dumbass. He should be thoroughly shamed if he did say this. It's pure ignorance.
posted by O-TrapI live in the limits of a city with a couple hundred thousand people. I'm hugely pro-city.
"pro-city" sounds like a really dumb concept.
City life is preferable, even a necessity, for many people for many reasons....but if you could, why wouldn't you want acreage in the mountains, or on a lake (or both)? In an ideal world, you'd have both.
I don't think one is preferable to the other. But I have to say people who are happy as pie to hunt and fish and live modestly maybe aren't the problem with this country.
So I watched some of the "bombshell" hearings...
And we are, once again, arguing impeachment about "the President ATTEMPTED.....". Because Jim Jordan pretty much destroyed the quid pro quo aspect because the argument was the aid was conditional on a commitment to investigate, but the aid was released with no such commitment.
One of the interesting aspects brought up was "Trump's action potentially went against established US policy in the region". Wait a minute - so you're telling me foreign policy is decided by unelected career officials and not the POTUS?!? That is what I've always suspected, I just want to make sure I understood.
posted by gutSo I watched some of the "bombshell" hearings...
And we are, once again, arguing impeachment about "the President ATTEMPTED.....". Because Jim Jordan pretty much destroyed the quid pro quo aspect because the argument was the aid was conditional on a commitment to investigate, but the aid was released with no such commitment.
One of the interesting aspects brought up was "Trump's action potentially went against established US policy in the region". Wait a minute - so you're telling me foreign policy is decided by unelected career officials and not the POTUS?!? That is what I've always suspected, I just want to make sure I understood.
If this is the left’s idea of running interference to deflect from the soon-to-be-released reports of FISA abuse, illegal spying, and other criminality related to the coup attempts, then they are in deep trouble. Simply pathetic that they are wasting valuable time and money on this charade.
posted by gut"pro-city" sounds like a really dumb concept.
City life is preferable, even a necessity, for many people for many reasons....but if you could, why wouldn't you want acreage in the mountains, or on a lake (or both)? In an ideal world, you'd have both.
I don't think one is preferable to the other. But I have to say people who are happy as pie to hunt and fish and live modestly maybe aren't the problem with this country.
Having lived in rural, suburban, and urban settings, I just prefer the urban setting. I like the smaller plot because it's all I really need, and it's less maintenance. I don't need the acreage, so I really don't have any desire for it.
I prefer lots of people around as opposed to water or mountains (though you might be able to talk me into a more populated coastal city). It's not that I'd mind them. I just don't really care one way or the other about them. I've really fallen in love with city life. From the diversity in the people to the wider access to food, entertainment, and industry, it makes life more interesting, I think.
I see a clear preference, but I acknowledge that it is, of course, a matter of taste. And you're right, people who want to live in wide-open spaces (ie. basically everyone I grew up around) are really not the problem at all. The "problem" is busy-bodies trying to force conformity on matters of taste that don't harm anyone ... like this "educator" in the article.