Author Topic: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation  (Read 17873 times)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #100 on: February 02, 2022, 12:33:39 PM »
It's not up to me. FB makes the rules for FB. If they want to decide that any post that advocates for racial criteria in hiring or admissions is racist, they can do that. They are then subject to public backlash for making that choice.

That's fine but it's a different conversarion. Seriati, at any rate, seems to be saying that this is FB effectively operating as a publisher, not a free platform. Can private entities curate and disseminate content of their own choice? Sure, but then they're responsible for it. That's his point. And if they want no responsibility then they shouldn't be acting as a publisher with an agenda (whether you personally happen to agree with that agenda or not).

My view is perhaps even more extreme than Seriati's, as personally I think the de facto function of a site trumps how it originated. If something has become - and it largely marketed as - a free forum to connect with people, I would personally argue that this should serve as a legal re-constitution of the site and that it should actually be illegal for them to curate content on ideological grounds. It would be the same as a city saying only liberals can go to the park - not allowed. The fact that it didn't originate as a park is immaterial (to me): if it is one now and its market share is because of that fact then it's a tacit agreement that they are now a park.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #101 on: February 02, 2022, 04:03:48 PM »
Fenring, I agree with your second point.  Facebook's model is to be open for the public and it should be treated that way, its inconsistent with their after the fact claim that they can moderate based on their own opinions.  Publishers do the later, not the former, and 230 should be open only for the former.

On top of that, despite what the Drake implies, it's no longer the case that people are "free to leave" FB.  Any number of official functions only convey or disclose information through FB pages or other social media, including, off the top of my head, some public schools, police departments, and town officials.  De listing yourself excludes you from information that is intended to be available to the public.  Those official functions are there because FB lied about what it was going to do and it lied about its role in the public space.  FB should either be held to being a public forum or liable for the consequences of those lies. 

It's market share is directly tied to its misrepresentations about it's moderation decisions.  It never would have become a platform of choice if had openly announced it's intent to discriminate for political purposes, or we'd already have major competitors and those official functions would announce across multiple platforms or no platforms at all.  TheDrake knows it's too late to put the genie back in the bottle, in fact that's what he wants, he'd be decidedly unhappy if there were social media companies of that size spreading the very content he thinks should be censored to 1.4 billion users (half of FB's announced accounts) without any oversight.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #102 on: February 02, 2022, 11:53:14 PM »
On top of that, despite what the Drake implies, it's no longer the case that people are "free to leave" FB.  Any number of official functions only convey or disclose information through FB pages or other social media, including, off the top of my head, some public schools, police departments, and town officials.

Just as an example of this, the daycare my kids attend only posts updates in a private FB group, which includes advisories about illnesses that have been identified in the daycare, closures, etc. They do not email or notify us in any other way. As a theatre person I can also attest to the fact that it's quite common to have FB be the sole informational gathering space for a show, aside from official emails which do go out with pertinent information. I used to say that the only reason I was on FB at all was for theatre stuff, which literally I could not do without (including for marketing). Now things are even more integrated and I would lose much more by deleting my account. You almost have to be a luddite to 'get off social media.' Deleting your FB now is becoming what 'no more computer time' was in the year 2000. You might as well say that as a professional you don't really need a cell phone.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #103 on: February 05, 2022, 11:25:57 AM »
The deliberate decision involved in creating 230 was not to empower censorship, but rather to encourage user selected content filtering, while also seeking to eliminate criminal content from the internet.  The latter was important as well because of the argument that such content was protected by free speech (which it's not) and that platforms should be liable if a user posts such content (which was technologically impossible - at that time - for them to ensure didn't get and remain posted).

My understanding of things prior to Section 230 was that SCotUS had basically delivered a ruling which turned ISP's into "content publishers" the moment they sought to moderate content even if their only basis for having done so was the content was illegal. (Child Pornography, etc)

Section 230 was created to provide a legal shelter for ISPs to content filter without being legally classified as publishers and thus be held liable for anything that appeared on their platforms which they hadn't (yet) moderated.

And as stated, those immunities were granted to achieve the various other objectives you outline.

Certain social media platforms are now abusing the legal immunities granted to them under Section 230, and that does need to be fixed. We don't need to go back to allowing illegal content to be posted without moderation or risk legal action as being a "content publisher," but certain provisions definitely need to be walked back.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #104 on: February 05, 2022, 11:30:04 AM »
But private companies do not have to let them speak on their site. Let them get their own site.

And the government doesn't have to provide those companies with legal immunity while they do so. Section 230 renders those providers legally immune to any "moderation" actions they undertake.

Government granted immunities should come with some degree of government(Constitutional) oversight in regard to what is being done with said immunity.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2022, 11:43:10 AM by TheDeamon »

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #105 on: February 05, 2022, 11:34:43 AM »
I *think* Seriati acknowledges that, he just wants 230 amended so that if you do any content moderation you are responsible for everything posted in real time? I'll let him clarify, but I didn't see him make any "except for" carve outs.

What this would essentially do is cause every content distributor to moderator approve every message, it seems. They'd have to perform fact checks, making sure they weren't going to be sued. Instead of having live debates, discussion on the internet would look more like letters to the editor.

No, it would mandate companies to clearly state their content moderation policies and practices, and leave said practices subject to judicial review if they breach their own AUP/TOS agreements on the matter. Under section 230, they can be extremely opaque on the subject, and have any lawsuits brought forward dismissed under section 230 immunities.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #106 on: February 05, 2022, 08:25:50 PM »
I *think* Seriati acknowledges that, he just wants 230 amended so that if you do any content moderation you are responsible for everything posted in real time? I'll let him clarify, but I didn't see him make any "except for" carve outs.

What this would essentially do is cause every content distributor to moderator approve every message, it seems. They'd have to perform fact checks, making sure they weren't going to be sued. Instead of having live debates, discussion on the internet would look more like letters to the editor.

No, it would mandate companies to clearly state their content moderation policies and practices, and leave said practices subject to judicial review if they breach their own AUP/TOS agreements on the matter. Under section 230, they can be extremely opaque on the subject, and have any lawsuits brought forward dismissed under section 230 immunities.

And that judicial review is murder. Imagine every disgruntled anti-vaxxer with the means rolling out a fresh lawsuit. Alex Jones getting to launch lawsuits instead of defending them. So again, practically, they either let almost everything go - or they take a severe editorial approach. I know which one I would choose. As soon as they published some kind of 100 page document for TOS that detailed all the crappy things they don't allow, people would start working around them. Which is why they can't publish a statement "your post was taken down because it used this word, and that punctuation. Because context is everything. Connecting a pizza parlor with paedophelia is not the same thing as connecting Matt Goetz with it. And it isn't because of his political party, its because there is evidence suggesting one and lunatic ravings in the other case. Although neither would currently trigger a ban, as I understand it. Pretty sure users are free to connect the Clintons with Jefferey Epsteins island paradise without fear of being banned.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #107 on: February 09, 2022, 01:49:41 PM »
In light of US Surgeon General Murthy's comments around censoring Joe Rogan I was trying to think of reasons he wouldn't just go on Rogan's show himself and get the his message on the record:

1. It would only serve to legitimize Rogan's platform and any information coming from it.

Too late. Rogan has far more eyes and ears than all the major news networks combined and needs no endorsement to be considered "legitimate". It would be the perfect forum to get in front of a massive audience to further legitimize your own ideas and opinions.

2. It's not a proper or optimal forum to appropriately/accurately convey the information he'd like to see corrected.

JRE is often a 3+ hour long-format discussion in which there is NEVER a "sorry, we've got a commercial break" interruption if things get contentious or awkward. It's literally a place where ideas and opinions can be fully fleshed out without fear of the idiotic 4-6 minute talking head back and forth you see on cable news.

Nuance and context can be fully explored and you can't get away with stating something unchallenged. That fact has bit Rogan himself in the butt many times and literally changed his POV in real time. Imagine that.

3. It would not be a fair environment and he wouldn't be able to properly convey his message and set the record straight without being constantly interrupted (ala Bill O'Rielly).

Rogan has faults but being O'Rielly-esque ain't one of them. He often admits he's wrong, sometimes in the moment and regularly says he has no idea if certain things are true and encourages fact-checks early and often. That doesn't mean he gets everything right, but it means his agenda is far less ego driven than the typical cable opinion head. He can have a strong point of view but tends to let his guests speak freely and does not cut people off.

So why wouldn't Murthy just go on the show? Why ask for censorship instead of simply countering misinformation to a massive audience directly if it's available to you?

I came across an example of why Joe Rogan isn't the best person to debate on his show.  While at times he may say he is wrong and encourage fact-checking, he does not really mean it, and at other times will utterly ignore the person he is talking to. 

Listen for a few minutes to his response to a PhD in Primatology in this critique of Joe Rogan.  It starts at about 11:26 into the video. What you have to keep in mind while listening to this "exchange" is that Joe Rogan was completely wrong about the Bondo Ape when he was saying this. Practically every single "fact" he asserts is wrong, as the host delineates after the excerpt. Or you could just see the summary on Wikipedia.

The entire video is worth listening to, if you have the time, in that the host nicely provides a rebuttal to the notion that Joe's program is a "perfect forum to get in front of a massive audience to further legitimize your own ideas and opinions."  ;D

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #108 on: February 09, 2022, 02:12:31 PM »
So about on par with being a Republican at a CNN hosted presidential debate?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #109 on: February 10, 2022, 03:53:06 PM »
Hardly!  ;D

Although it is somewhat like the way Trump tried to talk over Biden in that debate, where everyone talked about making sure his microphone could be cut off so that Biden could talk.  But not nearly as bad as Rogan.  It's probably what Trump was shooting for, though. ;)

And since the RNC doesn't even want their candidate to participate in the next Presidential debates, you can understand why any sane person would think twice about confronting Rogan's lies on his home turf. :)  Of course, this is the same RNC that censured Cheney and Kinzinger for "participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse"--a characterization of the January 6 committee that only imbeciles would say, since the commission is not persecuting any ordinary citizens (although the Justice Department is certainly prosecuting a few :) ), and since calling the January 6 riot legitimate political discourse is way out there in la-la land, something beyond what any sane person could say.  So you can't take them too seriously. ;)

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #110 on: February 10, 2022, 05:37:31 PM »
Although it is somewhat like the way Trump tried to talk over Biden in that debate, where everyone talked about making sure his microphone could be cut off so that Biden could talk.  But not nearly as bad as Rogan.  It's probably what Trump was shooting for, though. ;)

Are you...meaning to imply that Rogan is worse than Trump in having an honest conversation with someone? I'll just assume you miswrote the above.

Quote
And since the RNC doesn't even want their candidate to participate in the next Presidential debates, you can understand why any sane person would think twice about confronting Rogan's lies on his home turf. :)

Do you work for CNN or something? I never heard any Rogan bashing ever until suddenly he was a heathen saying the wrong thing about covid. I mean some people like him and some don't, but this idea that he has to be denounced is part of what I hate about culture right now: find the newest target and go after them if they dare to question a sacred cow. This is like how America was in the 80's under the evangelicals.

Based on this quote, you seem to be saying that because of what the RNC is doing (are you aware that Joe is basically a lefty?) somehow that means people shouldn't appear on Joe's show. *shudder* Yeah I guess he's on the side of evil now that he says all kinds of random stuff a small segment of which happens to vaguely overlap with certain right-wing elements, even though much more of it overlaps with left-wing elements. I guess you haven't watched many of his segments? Go watch any number of them interviewing actors, non-Hollywood celebrities, and yeah, even politicians. He doesn't have any "turf" other than he likes to talk a lot about MMA, diets, and various earthly pleasures. That you should act as if he's some kind of Republican pundit...man, you are so far outside of reality on this that it's quite astounding. Rogan says, correctly, that he just likes to have conversations. He can talk with Bernie Sanders and not argue with him about socialism (which if he was a Republican pundit he would have done) or about bottom-up concern for the people. He doesn't have a stake in any of that stuff. He's really not political. And *if* he has errors on the topic of covid, you would do much better to chalk it up to him being a citizen who just happens to be wrong, than a right-winger who has an agenda. I can't think of a famous host right now who really has less of an agenda. And yeah, I'm a fan, but I'm a fan because of these things. There's no BS on his show for the most part, even though obviously since he has no prep anything can randomly come out in a 3 hour interview. His mistake, if anything, is taking for granted the goodwill of viewers who are aware he isn't reading scripted bits and might occasionally misstep. Lacking goodwill, anyone at all on Earth could be caught saying something or other that could be used to punish them.


Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #111 on: February 10, 2022, 06:32:41 PM »
Quote
Are you...meaning to imply that Rogan is worse than Trump in having an honest conversation with someone? I'll just assume you miswrote the above.

Oh, there are far worse than Trump when it comes to shouting down an opponent.  He's still pretty much an amateur in that.  ;D

Quote
Based on this quote, you seem to be saying that because of what the RNC is doing (are you aware that Joe is basically a lefty?) somehow that means people shouldn't appear on Joe's show. *shudder*

No, what I'm saying is you shouldn't expect to get a fair shake from Joe if he doesn't want to give it to you, as ScottF implied.  If he likes you, he might do a little research and then agree to disagree with you.  If he doesn't, he'll shout you down, give you the Gish gallop, and then say you think you're right because you have a vagina.  ::)  He is another one of these misinformation kings, who tries to sound fair and balanced and then uses rhetorical techniques to dispel anything that contradicts what he believes, no matter how little it is factually-based.  I would never blame anyone who decides not to go on Rogan's show and risk being trampled.

Just listen to that excerpt once again.

It doesn't matter to me if he's on the left or the right.  There are plenty of rhetorical bullies on the left--typically the far left--as there are on the right.  The right just happens to have more of them as leaders (Trump, Cruz, DeSantis, Rand Paul, the RNC).  And while I haven't listened to his show, I've heard enough to know I can't trust him.  Especially to be fair to his guests and callers.

If someone wants to appear of his show, more power to her.  Maybe she'll be able to provide convincing arguments.  But don't be surprised if she doesn't get the chance.  Because he has in the past run-over people who have disagreed with him, and there is no guarantee that he won't do it to you.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #112 on: February 10, 2022, 07:30:56 PM »
He is another one of these misinformation kings, who tries to sound fair and balanced and then uses rhetorical techniques to dispel anything that contradicts what he believes, no matter how little it is factually-based.

According to your definition I think all human beings are 'misinformation kings'. He's a guy with opinions and says them. The term "misinformation" as you are using it just means he says something and you disagree. Any statement beyond that is you spreading a propaganda meme using slippery words to imply something that if asked directly you could deny (e.g. that Rogan is pushing an agenda for personal gain). You can apply this slippery non-term to make it sound like you've smeared him, without actually saying anything factual. So who is the misinformation king? But again it's a sign of the times. Say the wrong thing and it's not a 'disagreement', it's 'misinformation' that you will be 'trampled' on for disagreeing with. It really sounds like projection to me, he is super chilled out most of the time.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #113 on: February 10, 2022, 07:34:06 PM »
I wonder what kind of montage could be captured if we poured over ten thousand hours of your conversations. Or mine. Spotless? Never once saying something truly and utterly offensive, shouting someone down or spouting nonsense? Or would there be, I dunno, a super solid montage of you/me being stupid and/or rude?

I've probably seen/listened to hundreds (out of the thousands) of his podcasts and if he's considered a "rhetorical bully" we're all doomed.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #114 on: February 10, 2022, 11:14:42 PM »
(are you aware that Joe is basically a lefty?) somehow that means people shouldn't appear on Joe's show. *shudder* Yeah I guess he's on the side of evil now that he says all kinds of random stuff a small segment of which happens to vaguely overlap with certain right-wing elements, even though much more of it overlaps with left-wing elements. I guess you haven't watched many of his segments? Go watch any number of them interviewing actors, non-Hollywood celebrities, and yeah, even politicians. He doesn't have any "turf" other than he likes to talk a lot about MMA, diets, and various earthly pleasures. That you should act as if he's some kind of Republican pundit...man, you are so far outside of reality on this that it's quite astounding. Rogan says, correctly, that he just likes to have conversations. He can talk with Bernie Sanders and not argue with him about socialism (which if he was a Republican pundit he would have done) or about bottom-up concern for the people. He doesn't have a stake in any of that stuff. He's really not political. And *if* he has errors on the topic of covid, you would do much better to chalk it up to him being a citizen who just happens to be wrong, than a right-winger who has an agenda. I can't think of a famous host right now who really has less of an agenda. And yeah, I'm a fan, but I'm a fan because of these things. There's no BS on his show for the most part, even though obviously since he has no prep anything can randomly come out in a 3 hour interview. His mistake, if anything, is taking for granted the goodwill of viewers who are aware he isn't reading scripted bits and might occasionally misstep. Lacking goodwill, anyone at all on Earth could be caught saying something or other that could be used to punish them.

I think the thing that confuses things where Rogan is concerned is that he's what some might consider a "left-wing libertarian" and that "libertarian" aspect is supposed to make him "right wing."

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #115 on: February 10, 2022, 11:37:19 PM »
I think the thing that confuses things where Rogan is concerned is that he's what some might consider a "left-wing libertarian" and that "libertarian" aspect is supposed to make him "right wing."

Maybe. But if he's a libertarian, it would be in the sense of "lay off and let me have my fun", which is an extremely left-wing attitude. I've known many people, NYC and Montreal being particularly populated with them, who have this exact attitude and it can range to anything between lifestyle, sexual mores, dress, and entertainment. I've never known a conservative sporting this attitude, nor anyone in the "government should be small" right-wing-libertarian camp, because the people who tend to want carte blanche when it comes to lifestyle license tend to overlap greatly with those who do believe in government helping people and fixing problems.  Rogan doesn't exactly fit this mold because as a serious athlete he's sort of already in a really narrow category of people, which is why again it's no good to use terms like "misinformation" as if to imply obliquely that he's part of some anti-science movement.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #116 on: February 11, 2022, 05:38:34 AM »
Quote
Are you...meaning to imply that Rogan is worse than Trump in having an honest conversation with someone? I'll just assume you miswrote the above.

Oh, there are far worse than Trump when it comes to shouting down an opponent.  He's still pretty much an amateur in that.  ;D

Quote
Based on this quote, you seem to be saying that because of what the RNC is doing (are you aware that Joe is basically a lefty?) somehow that means people shouldn't appear on Joe's show. *shudder*

No, what I'm saying is you shouldn't expect to get a fair shake from Joe if he doesn't want to give it to you, as ScottF implied.  If he likes you, he might do a little research and then agree to disagree with you.  If he doesn't, he'll shout you down, give you the Gish gallop, and then say you think you're right because you have a vagina.  ::)  He is another one of these misinformation kings, who tries to sound fair and balanced and then uses rhetorical techniques to dispel anything that contradicts what he believes, no matter how little it is factually-based.  I would never blame anyone who decides not to go on Rogan's show and risk being trampled.

Just listen to that excerpt once again.

It doesn't matter to me if he's on the left or the right.  There are plenty of rhetorical bullies on the left--typically the far left--as there are on the right.  The right just happens to have more of them as leaders (Trump, Cruz, DeSantis, Rand Paul, the RNC).  And while I haven't listened to his show, I've heard enough to know I can't trust him.  Especially to be fair to his guests and callers.

If someone wants to appear of his show, more power to her.  Maybe she'll be able to provide convincing arguments.  But don't be surprised if she doesn't get the chance.  Because he has in the past run-over people who have disagreed with him, and there is no guarantee that he won't do it to you.

How many hours of Joe Rogan's show have you actually watched?

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #117 on: February 11, 2022, 02:53:05 PM »
And while I haven't listened to his show, I've heard enough...

aaaand scene.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #118 on: February 11, 2022, 04:05:48 PM »
Point taken, gentlemen.  I haven't listen to Joe Rogan.  I haven't heard his measured and thoughtful responses to his guests and callers.  I am being unfair to him based on very limited information and the reputation he has earned among some people.

Could you do me a favor to help me understand something, though.  Could you explain the context of the recording of his response to a caller that I mentioned before, staring at about 11:26.  Why was he so rude to this caller?  Why did he prevent her from talking?  Why did he shout her down?  And why did he have to mention her vagina at the end (or at all)?  ???

If I heard Anderson Cooper treat anyone that badly, I would lose all respect for him.  Tell me, after you've listened to this "exchange," why I should have any respect for Joe Rogan?  And why anyone should expect him not to be treated as badly as that PhD?

Explain to me why, in this particular instance, he was such a jerk.  Because it seems he was just bullying the woman for questioning his lies.  Explain to me the circumstances that would justify his behavior.

Can you do that?

Can anyone? ;)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #119 on: February 11, 2022, 04:30:19 PM »
I think it's a bit much to dig back to a comment made seventeen years ago to make your point. What did you google, "Joe Rogan's worst moments?" Not to mention this wasn't even his show which didn't exist until four years after this exchange.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #120 on: February 11, 2022, 04:55:29 PM »
Point taken, gentlemen.  I haven't listen to Joe Rogan.  I haven't heard his measured and thoughtful responses to his guests and callers.  I am being unfair to him based on very limited information and the reputation he has earned among some people.
Thanks.
Quote
Could you do me a favor to help me understand something, though.  Could you explain the context of the recording of his response to a caller that I mentioned before, staring at about 11:26.  Why was he so rude to this caller?

I'm not even sure where that's from, sounds like it's a super old recording but I'll give it a shot. It sounds like a younger, immature and far less measured version of Rogan treating a calller (?) like a heckler in a comedy club. That's not to say she was a heckler - and there's no real defense that I can think of. I'm sure he'd probably cringe if he heard it himself now.

As I said earlier, in the hundreds of hours I've listened to him I've only seen him go off once like that, and it was him confronting Carlos Mencina on stage and accusing him of stealing other people's jokes, which is what Mencina had actually done. 99% of the time he's calm and let's his guests talk without much interruption at all.

What I really enjoy is he doesn't let things necesarily just slide, and because it's long format he has the time to dig into every nuance he wants to. I recall him spending 15 minutes literally pinning Ben Shapiro down on why he thought being gay was a sin. It was polite but it was obvious Joe wanted Shapiro to be clear on just what he did and didn't approve of re: homosexuality, as his views are polar opposite to what Rogan believes.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #121 on: February 11, 2022, 08:30:54 PM »
I think the thing that confuses things where Rogan is concerned is that he's what some might consider a "left-wing libertarian" and that "libertarian" aspect is supposed to make him "right wing."

Maybe. But if he's a libertarian, it would be in the sense of "lay off and let me have my fun", which is an extremely left-wing attitude. I've known many people, NYC and Montreal being particularly populated with them, who have this exact attitude and it can range to anything between lifestyle, sexual mores, dress, and entertainment. I've never known a conservative sporting this attitude, nor anyone in the "government should be small" right-wing-libertarian camp, because the people who tend to want carte blanche when it comes to lifestyle license tend to overlap greatly with those who do believe in government helping people and fixing problems.


It depends on what they're "conserving" but "lay and let me have my fun" covers a large swath of the American "right wing" as well. (Their fun often involves guns though)

It isn't until those "conservative tendencies" start to overlap with religion("social standards") and "traditional practices" that you start to see things start moving quickly in the direction of the Republicans and you end up with Rand Paul. Who is libertarian on most things, except where it relates to his favored religious issues, at which point he starts to match up with many of the Republicans.

It's a strong illustration of why the traditional methods of "explaining" the US political spectrum don't work, because it doesn't rest on a simple line like the word "spectrum" would suggest.

Basically Right/Left as it relates to the United States, came into wider use starting in the 1960's counter-culture where the "Right-Wing" was conserving certain traditional social values (not Jim Crow or racism), while the Left-Wing decided to champion for "non-traditional lifestyles" and approaches to things. Really, up until the 1970's and 80's, the term didn't really mean much in US politics.

The Libertarians as a general rule, don't hew well to that right/left spectrum.

The Libertarian "test" is personal liberty (not to be confused with collective liberty), and it's typical counterpart is using Authoritarianism as being the antithesis of liberty. It just also happens that Authoritarianism also has another commonly understood counterpart/antithesis: Anarchy.

And much like you can can have left-wing Anarchists (often using that stage as a means to an end -- their communist utopia), you can have right-wing Anarchists, and several other flavors of Anarchist out there in the mix with a focus on specific topics.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #122 on: February 11, 2022, 08:34:34 PM »
I think it's a bit much to dig back to a comment made seventeen years ago to make your point. What did you google, "Joe Rogan's worst moments?" Not to mention this wasn't even his show which didn't exist until four years after this exchange.

Which makes it entirely possible that what might have seen was part of a comedy skit or larger setting? The guy is a comedian, and acceptable humor even 15 years ago is very wildly different than what is acceptable now.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #123 on: February 17, 2022, 04:39:35 PM »
So, a friend of mine just showed me a screen cap. It says "You're about to share this article without reading it" and warns that by sharing something you haven't read, you may be missing key facts. Well, or any facts. Presuming that this isn't selective, I'd like to say its a great move, but I suspect that the kind of people who do that probably won't get the message and they'll just override the warning.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #124 on: March 06, 2022, 02:45:28 PM »
In which the "reporter" recounts a horrible Ukrainian death count in front of rows of covered bodies, er, actors.

Welcome to the new news. I suspect there are hundreds of these kinds of reports for everyone that accidentally busts itself. We're f$%kd.

https://twitter.com/LouieKerr8/status/1500486894190215173

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #125 on: March 06, 2022, 04:21:40 PM »
There used to be comedy bits on shows like Jon Stewart's show where they'd show clips of 'news' segments which were in fact totally faked in terms of environment. Like a person standing 'in a hurricane' pretending to be blown around but it's a green screen, or showing footage of something from the wrong event 'live on scene'. Yeah, that's been happening for years now unfortunately. It's just theatre called 'the news'.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #126 on: March 06, 2022, 04:41:00 PM »
Anything published by Russia has a high probability of being fake.  They've been doing completely fraudulent 'news' about the Ukraine, on their official news sites, for many years.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #127 on: March 06, 2022, 05:30:34 PM »
Anything published by Russia has a high probability of being fake.  They've been doing completely fraudulent 'news' about the Ukraine, on their official news sites, for many years.

For my part I was referring to MSM news sources in the U.S.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #128 on: March 07, 2022, 11:25:01 AM »
So twitter scrubbed whatever it was that Scott linked. Did they infringe on free speech, or block dangerous information? Did they block a guy pointing it out, or did they block whatever the original source was? Scott's post doesn't give me anything to go on, not who was behind the video, who was amplifying it, etc.

Let's see what actually happened, eh? I presume this is the same case material.

rundown

This video keeps getting reused to promote the "crisis actor" narrative. People on twitter, apparently like Louie Kerr, appear to be trying to make some kind of point, but I can't understand what that is. Are they saying people aren't getting killed in Ukraine, its all fake and Russia is giving the Ukrainians foot massages?

The crisis actor myth is dangerous, it has led to harassment of parents whose kids got shot at actual, real, school shootings. We have maniacs like Alex Jones to thank for this, which is precisely why he got deplatformed by the tech giants.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #129 on: March 07, 2022, 12:17:18 PM »
The crisis actor myth is dangerous, it has led to harassment of parents whose kids got shot at actual, real, school shootings. We have maniacs like Alex Jones to thank for this, which is precisely why he got deplatformed by the tech giants.

Even if you accept the proposition that there are crisis actors, there are multiple interpretations one could have about what that's for. Obviously one would be that the event never happened and it's all fake. But another could be that there's no physical scene that in one quick shot shows exactly what the story is saying, even though the story is true. So in order to provide the succinct visual detail to illustrate the story they create it from whole cloth. That would not be 'faking' the news per se but rather treating a news cast as theatre where you are trying to dazzle the audience with amazing and stirring images. And in fact I do think this is what news stations do now as a matter of course. So this interpretation is not IMO far-fetched, and it's entirely in keeping with their practices to fake a video or use phony images in order to bolster the clickbait reaction to a real story. Manipulating people is money.

kidv

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #130 on: March 07, 2022, 01:25:08 PM »
In which the "reporter" recounts a horrible Ukrainian death count in front of rows of covered bodies, er, actors.

Welcome to the new news. I suspect there are hundreds of these kinds of reports for everyone that accidentally busts itself. We're f$%kd.

https://twitter.com/LouieKerr8/status/1500486894190215173

The link which ScottF posted was the doctored news clip described in TheDrake's "rundown" link.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #131 on: March 07, 2022, 02:25:35 PM »
False depictions aren't new. Go back at least to the drawing of the Boston massacre that they put in the newsprint. I can perfectly understand that lots of things are staged. I worked on amateur documentaries where someone was asked to do an action again. Or even suggested certain actions. The intent was benign, to better illustrate the truthful ideas, but it wasn't "real".

If you're going to say a victim of a war might stage something to reduce their enemies support? Yes, absolutely. Bodies have been moved to areas that make enemy bombing seem immoral, like body bags in front of a school. If you're going to make the accusation though, you had best do the diligence necessary to prove it.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #132 on: March 07, 2022, 05:46:44 PM »
The intent was benign, to better illustrate the truthful ideas, but it wasn't "real".
I realize this is akin to the on-the-ground hurricane weather reporter pretending to be barely able to stand as people walk unfettered in the background. Maybe it's just me but I'm against fabricating things (in this case dead bodies) and reporting it as fact regardless of intent. I do agree its value as propaganda is undeniable

Your documentary point is also good. I'd actually be ok if all twitter "news" reports carried the same "people and events portrayed in this content may have been dramatized" disclaimer that many documentaries have.
Quote
If you're going to say a victim of a war might stage something to reduce their enemies support? Yes, absolutely. Bodies have been moved to areas that make enemy bombing seem immoral, like body bags in front of a school. If you're going to make the accusation though, you had best do the diligence necessary to prove it.
What "proof" would suffice for you in this case? Proof that the body in the video wasn't simply the beginning of world war Z?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #133 on: March 07, 2022, 05:57:36 PM »

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #134 on: March 07, 2022, 06:03:16 PM »
"Dramatizing" photos etc. is a firing offense at most newspapers and broadcast news.  And would violate the photo journalist code of ethics.
 Indeed photo journalists are to generally avoid taking photos of things that were staged by 3rd parties as well.

Quote
Be accurate and comprehensive in the representation of subjects.
Resist being manipulated by staged photo opportunities.
Be complete and provide context when photographing or recording subjects. Avoid stereotyping individuals and groups. Recognize and work to avoid presenting one's own biases in the work.
Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.
While photographing subjects do not intentionally contribute to, alter, or seek to alter or influence events.
Editing should maintain the integrity of the photographic images' content and context. Do not manipulate images or add or alter sound in any way that can mislead viewers or misrepresent subjects.
Do not pay sources or subjects or reward them materially for information or participation.
Do not accept gifts, favors, or compensation from those who might seek to influence coverage.
Do not intentionally sabotage the efforts of other journalists.
Do not engage in harassing behavior of colleagues, subordinates or subjects and maintain the highest standards of behavior in all professional interactions.

https://nppa.org/code-ethics

Documentaries don't hold to the same (any?) journalistic standards.


LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #135 on: March 07, 2022, 06:04:24 PM »
There is some discussion to be had about when it is ethical to use stock photos or video footage - is it ethical to use generic hurricane footage in the background when discussing a hurricane?  What about generic bombing footage during a war?  What about generic protest footage when reporting on a protest?
« Last Edit: March 07, 2022, 06:08:30 PM by LetterRip »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #136 on: March 07, 2022, 06:25:32 PM »
What about generic protest footage when reporting on a protest?

This is something I've seen many examples of in the last several years. I can't be sure if it was on MSM sites, mind you, but I've seen so many instances of "hugest protest ever!" type articles showing photos of another, older, protest. So in this case the photos are not merely descriptive but are actively distorting the reality of the current event. I'm pretty sure I could easily dredge of examples of this in recent political campaigns, like Trump claiming to have record numbers (I've seen tons of campaign photos zoomed way too far in on the stage, or trying to make a smaller crowd look larger by shooting right up close to the participants from a low angle). And iirc there were examples of this from the previous election as well, where I believe photos from Hillary's rallies in the primaries were attempts to artificially show she was getting good support, in contrast to Bernie's rallies (which were in fact very popular).

Personally if I made the rules it would be illegal to use anything but legit footage as unsourced, and if you don't have any then a stock photo would have to include a big "STOCK PHOTO" label. And it's a known photo, photo credit must be given to the photographer or original user. Too many abuses are not only possible but in fact inevitable when you allow the use of arbitrary footage or photos when putting out information about an event. Maybe that means the news stations have to eat humble pie by occasionally having a broadcast saying "no photo available". But that would improve their credibility, at minimum.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #137 on: March 07, 2022, 06:30:12 PM »
"Dramatizing" photos etc. is a firing offense at most newspapers and broadcast news.  And would violate the photo journalist code of ethics.

Love the sentiment but that ship sailed a looong time ago.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #138 on: March 07, 2022, 06:34:38 PM »
Personally if I made the rules it would be illegal to use anything but legit footage as unsourced, and if you don't have any then a stock photo would have to include a big "STOCK PHOTO" label.
Yup, or DRAMATIZED FOR CLICKS and they can use whatever they want.

If we can force cigarette packages to show all manner of graphic health disclaimers we should be able to do the same for social media content.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #139 on: March 07, 2022, 07:13:01 PM »
If we can force cigarette packages to show all manner of graphic health disclaimers we should be able to do the same for social media content.

Huh. You know my initial reaction to reading this was "no, I wasn't talking about social media and random websites, I meant big companies." But you know what - if the government indiscriminately enforced such laws with full force against even a dorky little website "you have not attached proper attribution to that photo, you have 10 days to take it down or establish original credit and source" it would actually probably teach a lot of people about journalistic standard. Not that I'd want the government vetting blogs for content and banning them, but using IP such as photos...might be reasonable. Not doable, of course; no resources for that. But as a thought experiment it might actually be good to require even the dinkiest post or website to employ full IP credit and disclaimers when it's not original photos or footage.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #140 on: March 09, 2022, 01:22:46 PM »
But you know what - if the government indiscriminately enforced such laws with full force against even a dorky little website "you have not attached proper attribution to that photo, you have 10 days to take it down or establish original credit and source" it would actually probably teach a lot of people about journalistic standard. Not that I'd want the government vetting blogs for content and banning them, but using IP such as photos...might be reasonable. Not doable, of course; no resources for that.

Maybe not so undoable.  I tried out that TinEye website I mentioned before, and it came up with the random image I looked for pretty quickly and easily, even though it was from a relatively small website.  Took all of two minutes, if that.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #141 on: March 10, 2022, 10:19:54 AM »
Tucker Carlson accused the Joe Biden administration of actively goading Russia into invading Ukraine - a nefarious scheme by Democrats and even some Republicans to get the U.S. into a war with Russia that even included the first impeachment of Donald Trump

Tucker Carlson planted a 'idea' that  America was running secret bioweapons labs in Ukraine, and that the U.S. is actually the one attacking Russia with a disinformation campaign, rather than the other way around."

Does Tucker... Why what is he hoping to achieve?

What as a society are we doing? How can such crap end well?

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #142 on: March 10, 2022, 10:24:15 AM »
I can only assume Tucker is hoping to achieve a Russian paycheck.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #143 on: March 10, 2022, 10:24:55 AM »
Tucker Carlson accused the Joe Biden administration of actively goading Russia into invading Ukraine - a nefarious scheme by Democrats and even some Republicans to get the U.S. into a war with Russia that even included the first impeachment of Donald Trump

Tucker Carlson planted a 'idea' that  America was running secret bioweapons labs in Ukraine, and that the U.S. is actually the one attacking Russia with a disinformation campaign, rather than the other way around."

Does Tucker... Why what is he hoping to achieve?

What as a society are we doing? How can such crap end well?

The most prominent conservative commentator is pro USSR version 2. Ronald Reagan wept in his grave.

Is Tucker being blackmailed by Putin?

Going full bore Russian propaganda on Fox News, gross. What's wrong with the man?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #144 on: March 10, 2022, 10:28:20 AM »
Tucker was then slapped down by Fox's own National Security person says Tucker is full of crap.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-newss-jennifer-griffin-contradicts-tucker-carlsons-coverage-russian-conspiracy-083557670.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

The labs were not secret. Just because Tucker did not know about them does not make them secret.  And how did the Russians know they were there? Well they were Russian labs to start out with.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #145 on: March 10, 2022, 11:14:42 AM »
nothing makes sense to me anymore. Maybe it never did but now I can't pretend to pretend i know

Such men make me sick

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #146 on: March 10, 2022, 03:05:32 PM »
I thought we established that if you're going to invade a country because of secret bioweapons labs, you have to have some grainy out of context photos and present them to the UNSC first.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #147 on: March 10, 2022, 03:09:42 PM »
I thought we established that if you're going to invade a country because of secret bioweapons labs, you have to have some grainy out of context photos and present them to the UNSC first.

Don't forget the artist rendering of the Death Star plans underground base blueprint.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #148 on: March 10, 2022, 05:56:06 PM »
nothing makes sense to me anymore. Maybe it never did but now I can't pretend to pretend i know

Such men make me sick

Confirmation bias run haywire. The labs existed as part of the Soviet Union (they were Russian Labs) the US intervened to make sure they remained funded and secured. Because they didn't want that expertise to start "freelancing." In addition to those labs likely being National Pride issues for their respective host nations so shutting them down wasn't an option.

Next he'll be upset to hear the US has been giving Russia money and technical expertise to manage their nuclear weapons stockpile.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Biden's appeal on misinformation & disinformation
« Reply #149 on: March 17, 2022, 12:20:36 PM »
So the NYT is positioning the Hunter Biden laptop story as legit and real. Hopefully twitter and the other social media outlets ban the NYT for this and do NOT repeat the story. At least until the 2024 election is over so we don't spread any misinformation.

Sarcasm off. Twitter suspended a major newspaper’s account for a story everyone is now forced to acknowledge was true. That’s fine, right? We’ll just be moving on?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2022, 12:29:25 PM by ScottF »