If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Thanks to the likes of Fox News, we no longer have a fake sense of consensus in views. Or it could just be that our views are constantly evolving. Whichever you want to believe   (politico.com) divider line 110
    More: Interesting, Fox News, Tet Offensive, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Viet Cong, Philip Roth, President Johnson, Walter Cronkite, Tom Brokaw  
•       •       •

896 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Feb 2014 at 10:41 AM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



110 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-20 11:24:13 AM  

dittybopper: thamike: dittybopper: Rain-Monkey: Not sure if the consensus was fake, it did seem to represent the majority opinion.

Well, a convincing fake consensus would do that, or even a not-so-convincing fake consensus without any opposing viewpoints being aired.

We should celebrate the diversity we have now, because no one ideology or viewpoint has a 100% lock on the truth.  *THIS* is the Golden Age of news reporting now, not back when it was filtered long before you saw it, with little or no alternative viewpoints on the events of the day being aired.

"Viewpoints" on news shouldn't be televised as news.  Back when it was "filtered" we had the news, then we had talk shows about the news. Facts are facts.  Bill O'Reilly's interpretation of those facts has no bearing on them, and shouldn't be projected in such a way.  There aren't two sides to everything, and opinion is something that should rest on the viewers' shoulders.  They've taken your opinion away, fabricated a dichotomy, and framed the situation in a way that you must pick one of the two. Do you see the ethical problem here?

Well, I don't think Bill O'Reilly would be confused for a "news show", he's pretty much the very definition of a talk show about the news, not actual news reporting.

And yes, facts are facts, except when they aren't.  We've all seen reporting about things or events that we have in-depth knowledge of that were fundamentally *WRONG*.  Not even wrong as in "he said, she said" interpretations, but fundamental laws of physics type of wrong, yet we assume that the other things we hear or read are true.  Michael Crichton commented on the phenomenon, dubbing it "Gell-Mann Amnesia":

Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong i ...


Wrong account?
 
2014-02-20 11:25:31 AM  

SlothB77: People, especially on Fark, forget that Fox News only started in 1997 or 1998 - about then - and only in a few markets.  Before that, all we had was far-liberal slanted coverage with no alternative to call them out on all their bullshiat.  Libs had free reign for decades.  And as is obvious by the viewership that moved to Fox News, it *was* a fake consensus.


No. It wasn't a consensus. It was just "News". You are confusing the appetite of a certain segment of society for Fox News with liberal bias by other news organizations. People flocking to Fox confirms that those viewers wanted to see skewed reporting toward their viewpoint. It doesn't confirm that the thing they left was diametrically opposed, much as you want to believe it.

Conservatives *need* to hear what they want to hear because the world is going to keep on changing without them. It's the only way older generations can ever feel anchored in the world.
 
2014-02-20 11:26:57 AM  

neversubmit: I have never understood why people use alts when they are still the same asshole. Why Chance, do you do it?


Is that someone I should know?

Please, give me a percentage chance to the following two possibilities(it can add up to less than 100% if there are other possibilities too, that's okay.  I just want you to weigh some options):
A.  Someone wages a long and elaborate campaign against you, through unnecessary tactics, in defense of an elaborate (unspecified) conspiracy the internet should let them see clearly, and yet they don't
B.  Two different people identified the same serious mistake in your thinking that maybe, just maybe you should reconsider that idea
 
2014-02-20 11:27:02 AM  

ikanreed: //The best thing about morons is that they're always so sure how smart they are.


Just like how crazy people are absolutely convinced of their own sanity.
 
2014-02-20 11:27:42 AM  

Fart_Machine: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

You realize his quote applies to virtually everything on the Internet right?


Virtually. Nice weasel word that, but why limit it to just the internet?
 
2014-02-20 11:28:28 AM  

neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL


Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".
 
2014-02-20 11:32:57 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".


To be fair, that was my description of his situation, not his own.  I don't think he'd believe it's true.
 
2014-02-20 11:33:17 AM  

neversubmit: Fart_Machine: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

You realize his quote applies to virtually everything on the Internet right?

Virtually. Nice weasel word that, but why limit it to just the internet?


Um I used the word because its accurate and we are talking about the Internet? Do you only believe in absolutes?
 
2014-02-20 11:33:20 AM  

HeartBurnKid: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".


So there never was a fake consensus? It was just concision, right?
 
2014-02-20 11:36:19 AM  
I was also talking about the Hawking quote. Apparently when using the quote function from a phone it removes the picture URL.
 
2014-02-20 11:36:37 AM  

Fart_Machine: neversubmit: Fart_Machine: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

You realize his quote applies to virtually everything on the Internet right?

Virtually. Nice weasel word that, but why limit it to just the internet?

Um I used the word because its accurate and we are talking about the Internet? Do you only believe in absolutes?


I don't see where we limited ourselves to just the internet. No I don't believe in absolutes, where would you get that?
 
2014-02-20 11:39:21 AM  

neversubmit: HeartBurnKid: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".

So there never was a fake consensus? It was just concision, right?


Oddly enough there were these things called newspapers that were read more that they are today. So the article is bunk.
 
2014-02-20 11:40:56 AM  
BMulligan: 

"... or when a brash war correspondent named Dan Rather started filing reports from Vietnam which contradicted the government story"

Fake but accurate?
 
2014-02-20 11:42:03 AM  

ikanreed: serious mistake in your thinking


Secretary of State John Kerry said that "this little thing called the Internet ... makes it much harder to govern."
 
2014-02-20 11:43:55 AM  

Fart_Machine: neversubmit: HeartBurnKid: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".

So there never was a fake consensus? It was just concision, right?

Oddly enough there were these things called newspapers that were read more that they are today. So the article is bunk.


Is it your assertion that newspapers did not have an agenda beyond reporting the news?
 
2014-02-20 11:45:32 AM  

neversubmit: ikanreed: serious mistake in your thinking

Secretary of State John Kerry said that "this little thing called the Internet ... makes it much harder to govern."


If you associate knowledge with perpetually forwarded conspiracy emails as news.
 
2014-02-20 11:45:45 AM  

neversubmit: Secretary of State John Kerry said that "this little thing called the Internet ... makes it much harder to govern."


How about you tell us the thing we've(except dullards like me who can't use the internet for reals) alllllllllllllll woken up to, without being both crazy and wrong.
 
2014-02-20 11:46:55 AM  

ikanreed: neversubmit: I have never understood why people use alts when they are still the same asshole. Why Chance, do you do it?

Is that someone I should know?

Please, give me a percentage chance to the following two possibilities(it can add up to less than 100% if there are other possibilities too, that's okay.  I just want you to weigh some options):
A.  Someone wages a long and elaborate campaign against you, through unnecessary tactics, in defense of an elaborate (unspecified) conspiracy the internet should let them see clearly, and yet they don't
B.  Two different people identified the same serious mistake in your thinking that maybe, just maybe you should reconsider that idea


Keep in mind, neversubmit is a troll account, so he's basically accusing you of doing what he does.

That's assuming you're not him.

Or me.

o_O
 
2014-02-20 11:47:39 AM  

SlothB77: People, especially on Fark, forget that Fox News only started in 1997 or 1998 - about then - and only in a few markets.  Before that, all we had was far-liberal slanted coverage with no alternative to call them out on all their bullshiat.  Libs had free reign for decades.  And as is obvious by the viewership that moved to Fox News, it *was* a fake consensus.


Yeah, except that the far-right were already flocking around Rush at full-tilt crazy by 1994 and already having straitjacket-worthy fits over the "liberal media" by that time because actual facts weren't supporting the narrative they did (and still do) prefer to hear in order to confirm what they wish were true.

So, FAIL.
 
2014-02-20 11:48:08 AM  

Fart_Machine: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

You realize his quote applies to virtually everything on the Internet right?


I would say that quote applies much more to their paranoid "I know about the conspiracy; wake up sheeple!" than it does the rest of us.
 
2014-02-20 11:50:27 AM  
Fart_Machine

"...Do you only believe in absolutes?"


Absolutley not.
 
2014-02-20 11:50:29 AM  

neversubmit: Fart_Machine: neversubmit: HeartBurnKid: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".

So there never was a fake consensus? It was just concision, right?

Oddly enough there were these things called newspapers that were read more that they are today. So the article is bunk.

Is it your assertion that newspapers did not have an agenda beyond reporting the news?


Was it the agenda of the Lizard Jews or the Illuminati? You need to provide those Infowars links so we can be infromed.
 
2014-02-20 11:51:19 AM  

neversubmit: Fart_Machine: neversubmit: HeartBurnKid: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

Define irony:

Somebody under the illusion that he knows something everybody else doesn't criticizes others for being under "the illusion of knowledge".

So there never was a fake consensus? It was just concision, right?

Oddly enough there were these things called newspapers that were read more that they are today. So the article is bunk.

Is it your assertion that newspapers did not have an agenda beyond reporting the news?


Is it your assertion that 24-hour news networks and blogs don't?
 
2014-02-20 11:53:41 AM  
OR...

The propaganda wing of one of the political parties has so relentlessly filled the skulls of the gullible with so much partisan bullshiat that a significant portion of the population has become completely disconnected from reality and all common sense.
 
2014-02-20 11:55:55 AM  

Dhusk: The propaganda wing of one of the political parties has so relentlessly filled the skulls of the gullible with so much partisan bullshiat that a significant portion of the population has become completely disconnected from reality and all common sense.


Common sense is a synonym for "wrong" to me, at least.

But yeah, the reality-fox disconnect for fox is so strong that Fox news viewers are less informed than non-news viewers.
 
2014-02-20 11:56:59 AM  

Danger Mouse: BMulligan: 

"... or when a brash war correspondent named Dan Rather started filing reports from Vietnam which contradicted the government story"

Fake but accurate?


Actually, the claim at the time was that his reports were real but inaccurate. The bodies were real, but the implication that American troops were ill-equipped to defeat the Vietnamese insurgents was ridiculous and traitorous. And Cronkite was a commie for allowing the reports to air on "his" broadcast (as though Cronkite was making editorial decisions).
 
2014-02-20 11:57:19 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: ikanreed: neversubmit: I have never understood why people use alts when they are still the same asshole. Why Chance, do you do it?

Is that someone I should know?

Please, give me a percentage chance to the following two possibilities(it can add up to less than 100% if there are other possibilities too, that's okay.  I just want you to weigh some options):
A.  Someone wages a long and elaborate campaign against you, through unnecessary tactics, in defense of an elaborate (unspecified) conspiracy the internet should let them see clearly, and yet they don't
B.  Two different people identified the same serious mistake in your thinking that maybe, just maybe you should reconsider that idea

Keep in mind, neversubmit is a troll account, so he's basically accusing you of doing what he does.

That's assuming you're not him.

Or me.

o_O


/Sigh

Maybe I am crazy an/or stupid but I am not trolling. It's not a conspiracy, like minded people don't need such nonsense. We (the people posting in this thread) didn't get together in a back room before hand and conspire to do it, but here are.
 
2014-02-20 11:59:33 AM  

HeartBurnKid: Is it your assertion that 24-hour news networks and blogs don't?


neversubmit: Virtually. Nice weasel word that, but why limit it to just the internet?


I'm the one that said it shouldn't be limited.
 
2014-02-20 12:00:49 PM  

BMulligan: Danger Mouse: BMulligan: 

"... or when a brash war correspondent named Dan Rather started filing reports from Vietnam which contradicted the government story"

Fake but accurate?

Actually, the claim at the time was that his reports were real but inaccurate. The bodies were real, but the implication that American troops were ill-equipped to defeat the Vietnamese insurgents was ridiculous and traitorous. And Cronkite was a commie for allowing the reports to air on "his" broadcast (as though Cronkite was making editorial decisions).



I was refereing to the forged Air National Guard documents for the hit piece on Bush.  you know, the reason  Rather resigned in disgrace.
 
2014-02-20 12:00:50 PM  

SlothB77: People, especially on Fark, forget that Fox News only started in 1997 or 1998 - about then - and only in a few markets.  Before that, all we had was far-liberal slanted coverage with no alternative to call them out on all their bullshiat.  Libs had free reign for decades.  And as is obvious by the viewership that moved to Fox News, it *was* a fake consensus.


You know, if you were actually interested in such things, you would find that the press' alleged Libtard bias has been empirically disproved about a zillion times. But a real man of conviction would never let a silly thing like that impede his raging persecution complex, so bravo to you.
 
2014-02-20 12:07:12 PM  
People still haven't fully grasped how fundamentally the internet has altered our way of life. It's allowing for a never-before seen flow of diverse ideas. Not all of these are great, in fact most are terrible, but they've never really been examined in-depth and in any significant public forum before now. Which is why it's so noisy.

Remember the net is very new to us. Most of the country started logging on in the last ten years. The vast majority of our population has been trained to NOT think critically about the information presented to them, and they've been thrown head first into a medium that requires critical thinking to sift through all the bullshiat. To simplify, we've gone from being spoon fed by our parents to handed chopsticks.

Eventually, once the majority of the population's bullshiat detectors are calibrated for the internet, many of the silly notions will be tossed aside. As we mature with the technology I think we'll come to embrace E Pluribus Unum far more than we do now.
 
2014-02-20 12:09:45 PM  

neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL


I think you may have accidentally debunked yourself.  Conspiracy theorists are exactly the type of people Hawking is talking about:  those with bogus ideas about the world, but who believe they know better than the rest of the population.

Conspiracy theories are hard to eradicate in part because their adherents can't be educated.  They already consider themselves more enlightened, more informed, more aware of the TRVTH.  You try to tell them that "chemtrails" make no sense and you're just perceived as an underinformed rube.

And while we're on the topic, doesn't Hawking's premise imply that too much college education is bad?  One of the side-effects of college education is that people overestimate their own authority to speak on a subject.  Just look at all the people who make bogus economic arguments because they took ECON 101 as a gen-ed.  Something about taking ECON 101 convinces people that their political beliefs are no longer political beliefs, that they honestly know better than their opponents---even if their opponents are similarly college educated, or themselves economists.

For that matter, we observe that a lot of the idiots who withhold vaccinations from their kids are college-educated or better.  Their education seems to be part of the reason they decide to override the opinion of their doctor.  We may be converging to a population that lacks the humility of ignorance, and lacks the natural inclination to turn to an authority to get answers to factual questions.
 
2014-02-20 12:18:00 PM  

Boudyro: People still haven't fully grasped how fundamentally the internet has altered our way of life. It's allowing for a never-before seen flow of diverse ideas. Not all of these are great, in fact most are terrible, but they've never really been examined in-depth and in any significant public forum before now. Which is why it's so noisy.

Remember the net is very new to us. Most of the country started logging on in the last ten years. The vast majority of our population has been trained to NOT think critically about the information presented to them, and they've been thrown head first into a medium that requires critical thinking to sift through all the bullshiat. To simplify, we've gone from being spoon fed by our parents to handed chopsticks.

Eventually, once the majority of the population's bullshiat detectors are calibrated for the internet, many of the silly notions will be tossed aside. As we mature with the technology I think we'll come to embrace E Pluribus Unum far more than we do now.


You're making the implicit assumption that peoples' "bullshiat detectors" are ever going to keep up.
 
2014-02-20 12:18:07 PM  

Teufelaffe: Fart_Machine: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

You realize his quote applies to virtually everything on the Internet right?

I would say that quote applies much more to their paranoid "I know about the conspiracy; wake up sheeple!" than it does the rest of us.


Teach the Conspiracy.
 
2014-02-20 12:19:49 PM  

Wake Up Sheeple: Teach the Conspiracy.


Conspiraversy.  That's my term for it now, whenever conspiracy theories are given air time with a legitimate understanding of things.

Welcome back to the History Channel.
 
2014-02-20 12:26:02 PM  

Xcott: neversubmit: ikanreed: neversubmit: Fine I'll be crazy you can stay a sucker.

Yeah, you're just crazy.  The fact that you think of yourself as magically more aware of shiat than others just makes you crazy.   Like there isn't a crazy-sucker dichotomy, there's just a crazy flag.

There's always been a lot going on in the world, not all of it just and right, and there isn't some elaborate conspiracy to "wake up to".

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 850x850]

Be a good biatch and suck it! LOL

I think you may have accidentally debunked yourself.  Conspiracy theorists are exactly the type of people Hawking is talking about:  those with bogus ideas about the world, but who believe they know better than the rest of the population.

Conspiracy theories are hard to eradicate in part because their adherents can't be educated.  They already consider themselves more enlightened, more informed, more aware of the TRVTH.  You try to tell them that "chemtrails" make no sense and you're just perceived as an underinformed rube.

And while we're on the topic, doesn't Hawking's premise imply that too much college education is bad?  One of the side-effects of college education is that people overestimate their own authority to speak on a subject.  Just look at all the people who make bogus economic arguments because they took ECON 101 as a gen-ed.  Something about taking ECON 101 convinces people that their political beliefs are no longer political beliefs, that they honestly know better than their opponents---even if their opponents are similarly college educated, or themselves economists.

For that matter, we observe that a lot of the idiots who withhold vaccinations from their kids are college-educated or better.  Their education seems to be part of the reason they decide to override the opinion of their doctor.  We may be converging to a population that lacks the humility of ignorance, and lacks the natural inclination to turn to an authority to get answers to factual questions.


I'm not any kind of theorists. Most of the population doesn't know who their congress critter is let alone who they're sell their vote to.

Chemtrails again!?!

Operation Popeye was a highly classified weather modification program in Southeast Asia during 1967-1972. The cloud seeding operation during the Vietnam war ran from March 20, 1967 until July 5, 1972 in an attempt to extend the monsoon season, specifically over areas of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The operation was used to induce rain and extend the East Asian Monsoon season in support of U.S. government efforts related to the War in Southeast Asia.

Project Stormfury, Charged Aerosol Release Experiment, and many others. Yes it's all old news because that's all I have.

No Hawking's premise does not imply too much (whatever that is) education is bad. It's more along the lines of what Nietzsche say about people not wanting their illusions destroyed.
 
2014-02-20 12:28:28 PM  

Danger Mouse: BMulligan: Danger Mouse: BMulligan: 

"... or when a brash war correspondent named Dan Rather started filing reports from Vietnam which contradicted the government story"

Fake but accurate?

Actually, the claim at the time was that his reports were real but inaccurate. The bodies were real, but the implication that American troops were ill-equipped to defeat the Vietnamese insurgents was ridiculous and traitorous. And Cronkite was a commie for allowing the reports to air on "his" broadcast (as though Cronkite was making editorial decisions).


I was refereing to the forged Air National Guard documents for the hit piece on Bush.  you know, the reason  Rather resigned in disgrace.


Yes, we all understood what you were doing. Subtlety is not your forte.
 
2014-02-20 12:29:05 PM  

ikanreed: Wake Up Sheeple: Teach the Conspiracy.

Conspiraversy.  That's my term for it now, whenever conspiracy theories are given air time with a legitimate understanding of things.

Welcome back to the History Channel.


Wake up = conspiracy theories to you?

So when you called me crazy you were projecting, I see that now. Good luck with your whale Ahab.
 
2014-02-20 12:29:08 PM  

neversubmit: Yes it's all old news because that's all I have.


you can always post pictures of contrails
 
2014-02-20 12:30:32 PM  

neversubmit: Yes it's all old news because that's all I have.


Then why the hell do you conclude the Internet changed anything.

//Also people were aware the Vietnam war was dumb and shiatty, even in the 70s.  Your point is even more muddled.
 
2014-02-20 12:32:03 PM  

neversubmit: Wake up = conspiracy theories to you?


Yes.  Yes, I do make that connection.
 
2014-02-20 12:34:47 PM  

ikanreed: neversubmit: Yes it's all old news because that's all I have.

Then why the hell do you conclude the Internet changed anything.

//Also people were aware the Vietnam war was dumb and shiatty, even in the 70s.  Your point is even more muddled.


That's why Nixon did so poorly in 1972.
 
2014-02-20 12:37:15 PM  

neversubmit: Wake up = conspiracy theories to you?


not to me
 
2014-02-20 12:38:15 PM  

ikanreed: Dhusk: The propaganda wing of one of the political parties has so relentlessly filled the skulls of the gullible with so much partisan bullshiat that a significant portion of the population has become completely disconnected from reality and all common sense.

Common sense is a synonym for "wrong" to me, at least.

But yeah, the reality-fox disconnect for fox is so strong that Fox news viewers are less informed than non-news viewers.


A phrase from my BBSing days in the 90s: 'Common Sense Ain't'.
 
2014-02-20 12:39:08 PM  

namatad: thamike: dittybopper: Rain-Monkey: Not sure if the consensus was fake, it did seem to represent the majority opinion.

Well, a convincing fake consensus would do that, or even a not-so-convincing fake consensus without any opposing viewpoints being aired.

We should celebrate the diversity we have now, because no one ideology or viewpoint has a 100% lock on the truth.  *THIS* is the Golden Age of news reporting now, not back when it was filtered long before you saw it, with little or no alternative viewpoints on the events of the day being aired.

"Viewpoints" on news shouldn't be televised as news.  Back when it was "filtered" we had the news, then we had talk shows about the news. Facts are facts.  Bill O'Reilly's interpretation of those facts has no bearing on them, and shouldn't be projected in such a way.  There aren't two sides to everything, and opinion is something that should rest on the viewers' shoulders.  They've taken your opinion away, fabricated a dichotomy, and framed the situation in a way that you must pick one of the two. Do you see the ethical problem here?

THIS

I actually lost a friend over the definition of the word Bias.
They insisted that Fox News was unbiased and all other news was Biased.
I tried to explain that ALL NEWS is BIASED. Some more than others.

No point in ever talking to a box of rocks.


I actually got my grandmother to take in that a bias you agree with is not a lack of bias.
 
2014-02-20 12:46:42 PM  

Zarquon's Flat Tire: namatad: thamike: dittybopper: Rain-Monkey: Not sure if the consensus was fake, it did seem to represent the majority opinion.

Well, a convincing fake consensus would do that, or even a not-so-convincing fake consensus without any opposing viewpoints being aired.

We should celebrate the diversity we have now, because no one ideology or viewpoint has a 100% lock on the truth.  *THIS* is the Golden Age of news reporting now, not back when it was filtered long before you saw it, with little or no alternative viewpoints on the events of the day being aired.

"Viewpoints" on news shouldn't be televised as news.  Back when it was "filtered" we had the news, then we had talk shows about the news. Facts are facts.  Bill O'Reilly's interpretation of those facts has no bearing on them, and shouldn't be projected in such a way.  There aren't two sides to everything, and opinion is something that should rest on the viewers' shoulders.  They've taken your opinion away, fabricated a dichotomy, and framed the situation in a way that you must pick one of the two. Do you see the ethical problem here?

THIS

I actually lost a friend over the definition of the word Bias.
They insisted that Fox News was unbiased and all other news was Biased.
I tried to explain that ALL NEWS is BIASED. Some more than others.

No point in ever talking to a box of rocks.

I actually got my grandmother to take in that a bias you agree with is not a lack of bias.


Impressive! Old people tend be hard to change.
I gave up with this friend. They were young and smart and educated and unwilling to admit that bias exists and pretending that your news source is unbiased is .... insane.

You can not talk to religious people about their beliefs. Belief in god, belief in rush. Pretty much the same unquestioning belief in the holy truth.

Terrifying to watch someone lose their mind that way.
 
2014-02-20 12:51:51 PM  
All enemies of complacency are welcome at my information buffet.
 
2014-02-20 12:52:43 PM  

BMulligan: Danger Mouse: BMulligan: Danger Mouse: BMulligan: 

"... or when a brash war correspondent named Dan Rather started filing reports from Vietnam which contradicted the government story"

Fake but accurate?

Actually, the claim at the time was that his reports were real but inaccurate. The bodies were real, but the implication that American troops were ill-equipped to defeat the Vietnamese insurgents was ridiculous and traitorous. And Cronkite was a commie for allowing the reports to air on "his" broadcast (as though Cronkite was making editorial decisions).


I was refereing to the forged Air National Guard documents for the hit piece on Bush.  you know, the reason  Rather resigned in disgrace.

Yes, we all understood what you were doing. Subtlety is not your forte.


We??? Just how many voices in your head do you have?
 
2014-02-20 12:52:47 PM  

neversubmit: No Hawking's premise does not imply too much (whatever that is) education is bad. It's more along the lines of what Nietzsche say about people not wanting their illusions destroyed.


If college gives you the false impression that you know more than you do on certain subjects, then it doesn't exclusively destroy illusions, but also reinforces them.

The same is true of the Internet as a source of information:  it doesn't just inform people, but misinforms people, and can confirm bogus beliefs by wrapping them in a veneer of authoritative language.  The anti-vaxx movement didn't happen in spite of the information age, it happened because of the information age.  The information age didn't wake people up from a previous dark age of widespread anti-vaxxing.
 
2014-02-20 01:32:44 PM  

ikanreed: neversubmit: Wake up = conspiracy theories to you?

Yes.  Yes, I do make that connection.


It's not your fault, I didn't mean to blow the dog whistle. It's not your fault. I didn't even know it was a whistle. It's not your fault. /hugs
 
Displayed 50 of 110 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report