[HN Gopher] Amazon Prime video gives amateur how-to's, conspirac...
___________________________________________________________________
Amazon Prime video gives amateur how-to's, conspiracy theories a
stage
Author : vo2maxer
Score : 68 points
Date : 2020-01-24 18:39 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
| rootsudo wrote:
| How does this compare to Youtube? There's no barriers there.
| parliament32 wrote:
| Paywalled
|
| https://archive.is/1pzuJ
| colordrops wrote:
| How dare someone provide an open forum and allow individuals to
| investigate and use their own critical thinking skills? It goes
| against the principles of our constitution.
| influx wrote:
| Yes, we should create licenses, and it should be vetted by the
| existing media institutions to make sure the opinions and facts
| are correct!
| mbreedlove wrote:
| We can call it "fact checking"!
| ineedasername wrote:
| You say that as though people aren't susceptible to influence
| form malicious actors spouting propaganda. It's pretty clear
| that the current state of affairs allows a greater degree of
| emotional and psychological manipulation than has been possible
| in the past. That rather undercuts your idea that rational
| people can bring their critical thinking skills to bear on it
| and cut through it. It's simply not how human psychology works.
|
| All of which is somewhat besides the point and off topic from
| this particular issue: When Amazon Video started out, it was
| not an open forum-- it was not YouTube. Part of its appeal was
| that it was a somewhat curated selection of content. Watering
| that down with content that takes more time & mental effort to
| sift through the crap isn't really a great experience or what
| drew people to the platform. Believing Amazon shouldn't do that
| is hardly a blow against free speech or something.
|
| I also fail to see how curated content somehow goes against the
| values of the constitution. Every news paper, book publisher,
| TV channel or other media outlet, ever, has exerted editorial
| discretion over the content they choose to make available.
| Believing that model to be superior to a "fire hose" approach
| is not inherently anti-constitutional.
| colordrops wrote:
| It doesn't literally go against the constitution, but there
| are no open forums anymore as they've all resorted to
| deplatforming because they keep pushing this message you
| support, that they know better than the lowly masses. Even
| 4chan has been heavily mitigated. You are wrong if you think
| the people running mass media outlets have your best
| interests in mind when they decide which content is kosher
| and which is not. I'd rather filter through a lot of junk
| than not have access at all to the few valuable and truthful
| bits that get "caught" in the corporate filter as false
| positives.
| RandomTisk wrote:
| Censor them! Off with their heads!
| neonate wrote:
| http://archive.md/1pzuJ
| verelo wrote:
| Any non-paywall link out there?
| ihuman wrote:
| Open the "web" link in private mode, then click the article.
| verelo wrote:
| I might be misunderstanding, when i open the link in private
| mode it behaves the same as it does in non-private.
| ihuman wrote:
| In HN, there is a link labeled "web" under the title. Open
| that link in private mode, then click the wsj link.
| misterprime wrote:
| On Firefox and Chrome the paywall is in full force in
| private mode. Not just you.
|
| I'm not sure if disabling javascript still works. It used
| to.
|
| Also, pasting the link into archive.is used to work, but I
| think that hole got plugged some months ago as well.
| [checking] Oh wait no, someone got it to work. Here:
|
| http://archive.is/1pzuJ
| verelo wrote:
| Excellent, thank you! I didn't realize this was possible,
| appreciate you taking the time to educate me.
| [deleted]
| lpolovets wrote:
| Netflix has some similar content, like the recent series about
| Goop: https://collider.com/the-goop-lab-review-netflix-gwyneth-
| pal.... I'm disappointed by both companies. I can't imagine these
| kinds of moves drive revenue in a meaningful way, but they have a
| lot of (social) downside by legitimizing harmful views.
| crazynick4 wrote:
| Yes, let's have Netflix and Amazon decide what is a legitimate
| view. If you don't like it don't watch it. Unless these films
| are actively calling for violence (I dont know if they are) I
| don't see what the problem is.
| mplewis wrote:
| Actively calling for violence isn't the only way for a piece
| of media to cause social harm.
| Apocryphon wrote:
| Both private bookstores and public libraries curate their
| offerings selectively. This isn't the Internet Archive, the
| equivalent to the Library of Congress or another institution
| that stores everything.
| pjkundert wrote:
| I, for one, welcome our new government overlords. Me and my
| family feel completely incapable of judging the truth or
| falsehood of claims based on evidence and testing hypotheses.
| SketchySeaBeast wrote:
| I'm not saying the government is always right, but are you
| saying you are? Have you tested the hypothesis that the earth
| is round? That we landed on the moon? Where does your line
| between self-evident and requiring testing lay?
| marketingfool wrote:
| As corrupt and inefficient as governments are, they seem to win
| wars and force vaccination.
|
| But they also extremely inefficient, murder their own people
| and intentionally hide their corruption and mistakes.
|
| I'm not sure what is best. Maybe middle of the road.
| brenden2 wrote:
| To be fair, Netflix also has a bunch of conspiracy theory shows
| in the "documentary" section.
| jandrese wrote:
| For example, "Behind the Curve" about Flat Earth Proponents.
| chasd00 wrote:
| I blame Michael Moore for destroying the definition of the
| Documentary genre.
| SkyBelow wrote:
| It is far smaller a stage than an open internet has given people,
| some of whom use it for far worse things than either Amateur How-
| To's or Conspiracy Theories. The solution should be to education
| society, not lock down information flow to protect society. For
| kids it is a bit different, but that's on the parents to protect
| their child and no amount of technology is going to fully
| counteract neglectful parenting.
| smacktoward wrote:
| Part of the conspiracy theorists' standard self-defense toolkit
| is training their followers to believe that all mainstream
| sources of news, science and education are hopelessly
| compromised and should thus be studiously ignored.
|
| How do you propose to educate someone who believes that?
| grimjack00 wrote:
| This is one of the reasons I'm not in favor of much of the
| deplatforming that has been going on. It's not just that the
| mainstream sources are supposed to be compromised, but they
| are actively trying to silence the speaker. When YouTube,
| Facebook, etc. _actually do_ silence people (at least on
| their respective platforms), they now have proof of at least
| that claim.
| SkyBelow wrote:
| A focus at the grade school level of using evidence to reach
| a conclusion instead of having a conclusion and backing it
| with evidence. For adults who already have their beliefs set,
| having someone close to them slowly analyze their beliefs
| helps.
|
| Also, realizing that sometimes the conspiracy theorist are
| right. How to draw a distinction between secret CIA projects
| or NSA spying verses faking moon landings and contrails.
| Getting conspiracy theorist to focus on true conspiracies
| might be far easier than getting them to drop conspiracy
| theories in general.
| [deleted]
| coldpie wrote:
| > The solution should be to education society, not lock down
| information flow to protect society.
|
| I'm not convinced the experiment we've performed over the past
| ~15 years is bearing this out.
| im3w1l wrote:
| This a small perspective. We have experimented with free
| information vs locked down information over many hundreds of
| years. We consistently see that bad people take control over
| the information lock and use it to create tyranny and death.
| reaperducer wrote:
| It's hard to say. I think it's more that society has changed
| and become less tolerant.
|
| The sorts of G-philes we used to distribute without a care
| over BBSes in the 80's get people arrested today.
|
| There was an article in the local newspaper a couple of
| months ago about a guy being arrested for sending someone
| bomb-making instructions over the internet. We did that all
| the time. Even plans for how to make a floppy disk explode
| inside someone's drive.
|
| The Anarchist's Cookbook didn't cause mass terror in the 20th
| century. I wonder if it's even available in libraries
| anymore.
| jedberg wrote:
| > I wonder if it's even available in libraries anymore.
|
| I just checked my local library, and they currently have a
| copy on the shelves that I could check out. It doesn't even
| seem to be "adults only".
|
| I've never actually seen a physical copy before (only
| photocopies of some pages that my friend asked me to "hold
| onto for him" and PDFs). Now you've inspired me to check it
| out next time I'm at the library.
|
| I know for sure that the PDF of the 2000 version by the
| Jolly Roger is still available online though.
| ben509 wrote:
| The biggest part of the experiment that has failed is our
| government run school system, so maybe we fix that rather
| than give the government more control.
| Despegar wrote:
| >The solution should be to education society, not lock down
| information flow to protect society.
|
| An extremely 90s tech utopian world view that time has proven
| to be misguided. And if you're not adjusting your thinking
| after the multi decade experiment where we tried it this way,
| then it's just an ideology and you're not really the educated
| and rational ubermensch you believe to be.
| SkyBelow wrote:
| I'm hesitant to adjust my thinking because the alternatives
| are far from acceptable. I have an inherent distrust of
| authority to give them the power to regulate, and I would
| hope that those paying attention to the unequal application
| of law would have similar views. Do you really want the same
| government that gave Epstein his weekends only jail sentence
| for his convicted (convicted, not alleged like in many cases)
| crimes to also be in control of what information is allowed?
| I'd settle for conspiracy theorist any day of the week.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| How can you trust that same government to educate the
| citizenry, especially considering private schools are
| increasingly out of reach for most?
| SkyBelow wrote:
| For concerned parents, be involved in your child's
| education and not depend upon the school to do the job.
| Overall schools focus too much on standardize testing, so
| if you fully leave the job to the schools you end up with
| good test takers who aren't going to do particularly well
| in many colleges.
|
| When it comes to matters of ethics and morals, you
| definitely should not leave that to the school and I even
| suggest some subversion of the often authoritarian
| message I find schools teaching (personal experience with
| a pretty below average school district, others may have
| vastly different experiences).
| [deleted]
| majormajor wrote:
| > For kids it is a bit different, but that's on the parents to
| protect their child and no amount of technology is going to
| fully counteract neglectful parenting.
|
| This is a bit harsh and naive. Given how easily it is to access
| the wide open internet these days, the amount of vigilance on
| the part of parents to avoid being "neglectful" like that is
| greatly increased. And that has a lot of negative side effects.
| ineedasername wrote:
| Yes, as a parent of multiple kids, it's been extremely
| difficult to keep tabs and set boundaries on this sort of
| thing that both keeps my kids from awful content and doesn't
| make them feel we're suffocating them. I was thrilled when I
| was able to take away my child's unfettered YouTube access,
| which I had to constantly monitor and curate, in favor of
| YouTube kids which has 99.99% of the time presented
| appropriate content. Though now my oldest is aging out of
| that walled garden, and we're back to stricter monitoring.
| It's hard. I want my son to be able to watch folks playing
| games he likes, get tips & strategies etc., but some of the
| language used... it's not great. He's old enough now that we
| can let him be exposed to it and use it as an opportunity to
| teach.
|
| Other things are much more subtle & subversive than mere foul
| or sexually suggestive language though. Something like _"
| f--- those carebear wuss players that help all the triggered
| snowflakes that want everything handed to them"_ I mean, even
| if you agreed with some of socio-political themes this
| suggests, the particular language used is one of social
| division, derision, and disdain. Not "virtues" I'd like to
| instill in my kids.
| SkyBelow wrote:
| >This is a bit harsh and naive.
|
| I would call it more fatalistic than naive. Even if we
| completely ignore cases related to technology we will find an
| overwhelming number of instances of children being harmed by
| neglectful parenting. Even if we ignored neglect and focused
| on active forms of child abuse, the numbers are horrendous.
|
| This is not a problem caused by technology nor one that can
| be fixed by limits placed on technology. I fear too strong a
| focus on specific issues like kids having access to an
| unfiltered google when the harms of neglectful parents are
| far greater, and when we have decided that parental freedoms
| are worth the trade off.
| aaron695 wrote:
| Wait till the Wall Street Journal hears about the religious
| channel.
| proximitysauce wrote:
| When the media and establishment are repeatedly caught misleading
| the public, the result is the proliferation of conspiracy
| theories and a culture of distrust. Alex Jones isn't the answer,
| but neither is he the main problem. The problem is corruption in
| the mainstream media. That's far more pressing than grassroots
| videos that while probably incorrect at least challenge people to
| question what they're told.
|
| I think there's a general and growing distrust of media that
| feeds into people like Alex Jones' popularity. I don't know how
| many of those people take him 100% seriously vs how many are just
| happy listening to an outsider that's taking shots at _known_
| corruption.
| majormajor wrote:
| Crackpots and nutjobs have always been with us, their existence
| doesn't tell us anything about today vs yesterday. A claim that
| today is "more dishonest" than times in the past is also tough
| to substantiate.
|
| The useful part of the debate today is if there is a
| responsibility for those who have ended up as potential
| gatekeepers to either _help promote_ those people or to _limit_
| their audience by moderating platforms. Historically, the
| unhinged got distributed only as far as they could personally
| manage to coordinate; should we be handing bullhorns out to
| _everyone_? Free speech vs personal responsibility vs whatever
| other buzzword you like.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _A claim that today is "more dishonest" than times in the
| past is also tough to substantiate._
|
| It's like how PBS has been pounding in its promos for the
| last few months that "We're a country divided like never
| before." Well, not really.
|
| Yes, American politics is terrible now, but it's nothing like
| back in the 1800's. Posting some of the campaign literature
| that was distributed back then would get you banned from any
| modern electronic medium today.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| Eh, I'm ok with a little commercial puffery. It is an
| election year, after all. When the Olympics roll around
| this summer the promos are going to say "it's that time
| when America comes together".
| uxp100 wrote:
| Divided like no time in the past 80 years would be true I
| think. Maybe not the last 100?
| nilkn wrote:
| The past 80 years include not just Vietnam but also the
| most significant legislative period of the Civil Rights
| movement. I'm not even that old but my dad was born
| before legal segregation was ended.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| That time we sacrificed 58,000 Americans in the Vietnam
| War was pretty controversial.
| rowathray wrote:
| Right. If people think BLM is controversial, check out
| the Black Panthers. BLM just wants a kinder gentler
| capitalism, the Black Panthers wanted to overthrow the
| shit and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| That whole 10-year period, really.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _When the media and establishment are repeatedly caught
| misleading the public, the result is the proliferation of
| conspiracy theories and a culture of distrust_
|
| Conspiracy theories happen whether the media is trustworthy or
| not. They existed many hundreds of years before there was mass
| media.
|
| There's just something about certain people that makes their
| brains click, "That logical thing doesn't make sense to me. But
| this crazy thing does. And I need to tell everyone about it."
|
| The internet has enabled the third part of that like never
| before.
|
| Before the internet, it was whackjobs in online fora. Before
| that they were on BBSes. Before that, shortwave radio. Before
| that, books, pamphlets, fly posters, leaflets, and handbills.
| Before that, they would just stand on street corners shouting.
|
| Most of the non-electronic methods still exist and are used
| frequently. From the guy with the megaphone walking around the
| Chicago Loop bitching about the FBI in his brain to Screamin'
| Jesus on the street corner of Lock Haven, Pennsylvania.
|
| The promise of the internet was to give everyone an "equal
| voice." We probably should have solved mental health first.
| lend000 wrote:
| You might be surprised by some of the people who hold
| unconventional views (hint: they aren't all crazy people
| yelling into a megaphone, and many of them keep their views
| relatively quiet to avoid being ostracized). It's a spectrum;
| there are the incredibly naive people who only believe what
| is 'mainstream.' Then there are the paranoid people who will
| believe absolutely anything that challenges the 'mainstream'
| thinking on a subject.
|
| The people with the most accurate view of reality lie
| somewhere in the middle and do the critical thinking for
| themselves. The reality is that conspiracies do and always
| have existed, and the mainstream today is very different than
| the mainstream 100 years ago, which was different 100 years
| prior, etc. (because those mainstreams were proven wrong on
| many levels, as our current one will be).
|
| Ask yourself honestly: would you have been on the side of the
| Catholic Church in the Galileo inquisition, had you lived in
| that time with your personality?
|
| On the other side, would you have been a patron of the
| charlatan John Taylor had you lived in his time?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Taylor_(oculist)
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| Having been raised in a charismatic Christian family, I
| suspect many of us would have sided with the religious
| authorities. Kids are so impressionable and it's hard to
| break out of a way of thinking when your whole community
| and identity is built around it.
| ng12 wrote:
| > The promise of the internet was to give everyone an "equal
| voice." We probably should have solved mental health first.
|
| This idea that you're only allowed a platform once you've
| been "fixed" is exactly what pushes people towards conspiracy
| theories in the first place. It's a reaction to authoritarian
| mono-culture.
| [deleted]
| LinuxBender wrote:
| I have a slightly different take on it. From what I have
| seen, conspiracy theorists, some of them at least, will see
| snippets of truth and will start to fill in the blanks. Their
| methods of communication are usually filled in with passion
| and emotion. The end result often looks "crazy", but has bits
| of truth that have to be sifted out. I've learned to pay
| attention to some of the nutters, because they may not really
| be entirely nuts. Rather, they may have serotonin balance
| issues and communication problems. I have found more often
| than not that they were right more or less, at least
| partially. Alex Jones is actually a prime example of this.
| Most of the things he has espoused for many years have
| actually turned out to be true, but when he communicates
| these ideas, he sounds really out there. I personally know a
| couple people just like him. It's the same story. They see a
| series of events. They try to put them together and are
| usually just a little off base. The real problem is how they
| convey the picture. I find that I have to calm them down and
| "bring them back to earth" to find out what they really saw.
| Aperocky wrote:
| > espoused for many years have actually turned out to be
| true
|
| I would say some of the things that he premised on was
| true. But the idea he developed base on those things are
| nuts. it's not how he communicated them, it's just what it
| is.
|
| (example not necessarily from Alex Jones, but just e.g)
|
| US flag furled up on the moon (correct) -> like the wind
| blew on it (visual observation) -> it means the wind must
| have blown on it (fallacy) -> we never went to the moon.
|
| Jet fuel cannot melt steel (maybe? correct) -> Therefore
| the fire it had on the world trade center cannot cause
| structural failure (does your chocolate not soften before
| it melts?) -> US did 911.
|
| The premise can be true, the idea can still be bs.
| jakeogh wrote:
| dv/dt #7 == g for over 100 ft (according to NIST)
|
| There is a ~40min video in my profile that is just
| footage from the day and mainstream technical talks
| afterwards.
|
| CB hacks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21057230
| LinuxBender wrote:
| For sure, there are a list of things he was way off base.
| I am just saying, there were many more things he was spot
| on and many of us thought he was just a nutter. My bigger
| concern around these folks is that individuals can
| exploit their characteristics by showing them snippets of
| true malfeasance, wait for them to get emotionally spun
| up and start making a fuss, then the malfeasance becomes
| something that nobody dare speak of, for fear of being
| associated with the "nutter". At least, if I were going
| to hide something big, that is probably one technique I
| would use. Let the nutter start spinning off the hinges
| and then nobody would dare talk about my evil plans.
| jfengel wrote:
| Unfortunately, that kind of conspiracy theory isn't just
| reserved for isolated nutjobs. Trying to remain neutral
| about it, it is either the case that tens of millions of
| Americans believe in a conspiracy of scientists to
| promulgate a hoax about the climate, or tens of millions of
| Americans believe in a conspiracy of business interests to
| hide the reality of climate change.
|
| That's not an ordinary difference of political opinion. One
| side or the other is engaging in conspiracy-theory
| thinking, at a vast level. (Or, I suppose, both.) I don't
| just mean that they're talking about a conspiracy, but
| applying all the hallmarks of paranoia, shifting goalposts,
| and bad faith that mark conspiracy theorists.
|
| And that's just one example. It applies down the line, of
| many issues. This is the one that perhaps illustrates it
| best, but it's not mere partisanship. It's people needing
| to be "brought back to earth", as you said, but at a level
| involving many millions of people.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| >It's people needing to be "brought back to earth", as
| you said, but at a level involving many millions of
| people.
|
| That's the kind of talk that leads to re-education camps.
| jfengel wrote:
| I made a point of not taking sides. I'm just pointing out
| that the problem is very large, regardless of who's
| right.
|
| I'm also not proposing solutions. I'm sure there are many
| who would propose re-education camps -- that, too, is an
| indicator of the magnitude of the problem.
|
| I'm actually quite short on ideas for solving it.
| mc32 wrote:
| I don't know. I'd like to think if the media were not
| distrusted then they'd be more credible as authorities in
| discrediting crackpot theories.
|
| Unfortunately they wasted their credibility over the years
| and can't be trusted to be reasonably unbiased and without
| agenda.
| colordrops wrote:
| Good point, in summary, Alex Jones is the symptom, not the
| disease.
| VerDeTerre wrote:
| Or, to belabor the disease analogy, an opportunistic
| infection. Distrust makes it easier for otherwise fringe
| sources to spread beyond what would be expected in a healthy
| media environment.
| trekrich wrote:
| i watch alex jones, and fox news. And CNN and MSNBC. BBC Sky
| news etc. To try to get all the view points.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| Both Alex Jones and Hacker News are concerned about toxins in
| the US water supply!
| dobleboble wrote:
| Oh wow, a new account criticizing the "main stream media".
| yalogin wrote:
| Can you give me an example of "media and establishment are
| repeatedly caught misleading the public"? Are there documented
| cases outside of Fox news? Its a genuine question.
|
| I thought the rest of the main stream doesn't lie and if they
| realize what they reported is wrong they retract and issue and
| correction/apology as needed.
|
| My impression is the whole "media is lying" is a narrative
| furthered by Fox, right wing talk radio and more so Trump now
| to discredit the good institutions and to bring their trust
| level down.
| throwaway8879 wrote:
| And what about the rest of us non-Americans who have our
| respectjve local media misleading the public? Perhaps we all
| have our own mini Fox News entities that drive this
| narrative?
|
| I don't intend to bring too much cynicism in here, but if you
| outright believe any media in current year, whether
| mainstream or alternative, you are being misled. Everyone has
| an agenda.
| blackearl wrote:
| See any thread on a Bloomberg article. They pushed that "Big
| Hack" story and it turned out to be shit, yet never retracted
| it or fixed it.
|
| If you think the "main stream doesn't lie" you are extremely
| naive
| [deleted]
| proximitysauce wrote:
| Sure:
|
| * Harvey Weinstein was covered up by _many_ in the media as
| detailed in Ronan Farrow 's Pulitzer Prize winning piece in
| The New Yorker [1]
|
| * ABC killed a story about Jeffery Epstein in 2015 in part to
| retain access to the royal family. Epstein continued to sex
| traffic children for 3 years after this report would have
| aired [2]
|
| * The BBC covered up for Jimmy Savile's pedophila (and other
| horrors I won't reprint here) for decades. The head of the
| BBC during that time left right before the scandal came to
| light to become the current CEO of The New York Times [3]
|
| There are many other examples but these are recent and well
| documented.
|
| 1. https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-
| ove...
|
| 2. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/abc-news-amy-robach-
| jeffrey-e...
|
| 3. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/30/jimm
| y-...
| [deleted]
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| ...and yet, it was the center of big, old liberal media
| that broke the Weinstein story, not some investigative
| citizen-youtuber.
|
| And a large part of Ronan's story was to try _how_ this
| worked. It wasn 't that the people who knew (to varying
| degree) did not _want_ to out him. They just feared for
| their livelihood, and sometimes more.
| proximitysauce wrote:
| Even with Farrow's access and background he barely got
| the story out.
|
| > And a large part of Ronan's story was to try how this
| worked. It wasn't that the people who knew (to varying
| degree) did not want to out him. They just feared for
| their livelihood, and sometimes more.
|
| Correct, but my statement was about media
| trustworthiness. It doesn't really matter if people are
| keeping quite because they want to or because there's
| some super powerful individual that's coercing them to
| keep quiet, the result for the audience is the same. Why
| believe outlets that are covering up for the most heinous
| corruption and crimes imaginable? The media has a well
| earned reputation problem.
|
| Also, I'm not sure why you want to make this a partisan
| argument. It's not, there's plenty of corruption to go
| around. I deliberately chose non-political examples of
| corruption.
| mc32 wrote:
| At that point when they joined the chorus it was
| undeniable. That _had_ to. In the meantime for over ten
| years they kept things quiet.
| lend000 wrote:
| Remember CNN sharing debate questions to Hillary before a
| primary debate?
|
| Edit: source for the downvoters [0]
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Brazile#Sharing_debat
| e_q...
| rowathray wrote:
| Not sure why this is downvoted. The DNC chair had to resign
| after her conspiracy to rig the election was leaked by Seth
| Rich.
|
| CNN still up to the same tricks too. How did you like "Mr.
| Sanders, why did you say a woman can't be elected
| president?" "I never said that." "Senator Warren, how did
| you feel when Mr. Sanders told you a woman couldn't be
| president?". What the hell was that?
| creaghpatr wrote:
| The Covington incident was really nasty on the part of CNN
| especially but most outlets were implicated.
|
| https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/01/07/nick-
| s...
| ww520 wrote:
| This just happens now, right before your eyes.
|
| https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1220758756071497728?s=.
| ..
| kaffeemitsahne wrote:
| I can give an example from the New York Times relating to the
| Iraq War, I took it from wikipedia [1]:
|
| _In the buildup to the 2003 war, the New York Times
| published a number of stories claiming to prove that Iraq
| possessed WMD. One story in particular, written by Judith
| Miller, helped persuade the American public that Iraq had
| WMD: in September 2002 she wrote about an intercepted
| shipment of aluminum tubes which the NYT said were to be used
| to develop nuclear material.[83] It is now generally
| understood that they were not intended (or well suited) for
| that purpose but rather for artillery rockets.[84] The story
| was followed up with television appearances by Colin Powell,
| Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice all pointing to the
| story as part of the basis for taking military action against
| Iraq._
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_de
| str...
| thinkcontext wrote:
| That was not "the media is lying". Miller used Bush
| administration sources and confirmed with an Iraqi source
| that turned out to be the source of the Bush info. Its
| disputed whether she was misled by one or both of these
| sources or perhaps one of the sources misled the other.
| That the administration would rely on this reporting,
| rather than their own CIA which was calling it into
| question, is a reflection on their deception not the
| media's.
|
| It was bad reporting that was compounded by the editors not
| pushing back, as the article you cite goes on to say.
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| Yeah, it's always the story so old, it could have a college
| degree by now.
|
| The NYT got something wrong! 17 years ago! And that's
| why... OP no longer believes in globular world theory?
| crazynick4 wrote:
| MSM takes the same stance any time the US wants to go to
| war and, each time, the country invaded ends up worse off
| than it was under the dictator they had before.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Look at mainstream media coverage of any topic that you are
| an actual expert in, and observe how wrong^ they get it. Now
| assume their reporting on other topics is as competent.
|
| ^ Wrong in terms of facts, bias, what they choose to report
| and choose to omit, who they cite as experts, and other
| aspects
| powowow wrote:
| I strongly suggest you learn more about the history of media.
| Your post has nostalgia for a time that never existed.
|
| You may also wish to consider the notion that your perception
| of newfound media dishonesty has more to do with a well-known
| demagogue who has made it a mission to destroy all media
| outlets that do not fully support him than anything in the
| media.
| wavefunction wrote:
| My issue with conspiracy theory commercializers is that they
| don't give or promote the intellectual tools to "question what
| they're told", they just prompt people (primarily through
| appeals to emotion, especially fear and anger) and then turn it
| into a commercial product that justifies any lie. And there are
| real social effects from these conspiracy peddlers, like people
| who've lost their young children in a mass shooting receiving
| death threats and accusations that their dear child never
| existed and it's all a hoax.
|
| I mean, I saw an anti-vaxxer post from social media that
| unknowingly suggested "a small piece of a virus instead of
| toxic chemicals" as an alternative to vaccines...
| krapp wrote:
| It would be one thing if Alex Jones and his ilk were
| _actually_ challenging people to think critically and be
| skeptical, and look for evidence before reaching conclusions
| and to be aware of biases both external and internal. Those
| are useful values.
|
| But they simply declare that the entirety of the mainstream
| narrative is a lie (and that, therefore, _only the
| alternative_ can be trusted) and then tell you exactly what
| to believe and then eventually sell you gold coins to hide
| under your mattress for when the globalist feminazi lizard-
| men finally come for your guns and precious bodily fluids.
|
| People like Alex Jones aren't helping anyone, certainly not
| honest skeptics, I don't understand the efforts I see to
| portray him and others like him as merely the loyal
| opposition telling truth to power, or something akin to a
| court jester. Ok. The mainstream media is biased and
| corrupt... but if someone thinks the mainstream media is
| _more biased and more corrupt_ than much of the alt-
| conspiracy media, they 're very much mistaken.
| exabrial wrote:
| Don't forget Netflix, who is hosting Anti-Vax shows and movies
| and causing immense harm.
| ogre_codes wrote:
| Amazon is shooting themselves in the foot here. Prime Video is
| already mediocre so adding more crappy content just brings their
| average down.
| creaghpatr wrote:
| >After inquiries from The Wall Street Journal, Amazon took down
| "Endgame" and two other videos from Mr. Jones--all self-uploaded,
| according to the company--citing violations of company policy.
| The company's content policy focuses on issues pertaining to the
| sexually explicit, violence and copyright infringement, but it
| gives Amazon leeway to disallow anything it deems inappropriate.
|
| Another successful shakedown.
| quindecagon wrote:
| What is more dangerous, Alex Jones saying there are chemicals
| that make frogs gay or all major news sources saying that Iraq
| had WMD?
| rowathray wrote:
| Why not take down books too? What if Alex Jones publishes a book
| with the exact same content? Why does the video get zapped, but
| the book doesn't?
| IfOnlyYouKnew wrote:
| Because these people don't read.
| robsinatra wrote:
| I'm not vaccinating my children because of a video I watched on
| Amazon Prime created by someone with a lot of confidence and a
| tone of authority
| matt_morgan wrote:
| OMG this complaint is 20 years old. It is true of every new thing
| on the Internet since the beginning of the Internet.
| rchaud wrote:
| Now that everyone and their dog appears to be offering their own
| streaming service, we are right back to the "app store" days of
| competing on the basis of "total number of apps". Quantity over
| quality.
|
| BlackberryOS and Windows Phone tried this tactic by offering
| incentives for developers to build on their platform. The result?
| A veritable deluge of Bible apps, dictionaries, websites wrapped
| as native apps, you name it. Both BB and Microsoft were so
| desperate to get the total app numbers up, they did close to no
| quality control, and pretty much every garbage app went through
| unless they had blatant copyright violations.
|
| With user reviews eliminated from the big networks (I have Prime
| and haven't seen any user-written reviews in the UI), all we have
| to go on is the all-knowing algorithm to recommend what to watch
| next.
| lozaning wrote:
| When I was still in school Microsoft would show up like once a
| semester and throw a "Build an app party". They'd give you like
| 90% of the code and files need to make a really simple slot
| machine app (no real money, if you ran out you tapped the get
| more coins button or something). It took like 15 minutes to
| finish the app, and if you published your version in the MS app
| store they'd give you like $600 in free MS hardware right then
| and there.
|
| It was great, I did it every semester.
| big_chungus wrote:
| Here I am wishing they had showed up at my school. Out of
| curiosity, what hardware did they give you?
| Nightshaxx wrote:
| Well...dang....that's pretty good....
| nlbrown wrote:
| Perhaps Amazon is offering quantity over quality with prime
| video (and everything else) but there are numerous dedicated
| streaming services like HBO, Funimation, or Disney+ which have
| both large and high quality libraries.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-01-24 23:00 UTC)