222

Misinformation drove these people to vote for Trump. This is going be leopard eating their faces. Sad and shows just how much fake videos and misinformation can influence our elections.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago

How would you fix something that isn't broken? This is what for-profit capitalist media does and has always done. Manufacturer consent for capitalism and its desires. Regulation in the past made it mildly less obvious? I mean they still breathlessly covered and promoted the Red Scare a half a century ago.

Not to mention that state and nonprofit media still have issues. How would one fix any of them? The only way to fix the media is to fix the voters. Actually teach critical thinking stills and encourage them. Not gullibly devouring anything fed to you unquestioningly.

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink. All the information to debunk every claim ever made by Trump is out there. All anyone has to do is look. But most people cannot be bothered. They will just go with whatever hearsay they see on Facebook.

On that note I recently had to deal with my sister getting a bit frothy. Raging about how the Harris administration had spent so much more money than the Trump administration had on some meaningless thing. I had to insert myself and point out if there had never been a Harris administration. And that not even the Biden Administration had done what she was talking about.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 11 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

only way to fix the media is to fix the voters.

This narrative serves the capitalist class and cannot be proven. You don't "fix" voters, you create solidarity by dealing with their material conditions (engage in mutual aid).

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

Solidarity is great. And I I'm all for it. But how do you have solidarity with a group of people that cannot even agree on what constitutes reality. How do you address the material conditions of people who reject addressing the material conditions if it also helps someone who isn't them.

The answer is you cannot. Not until critical thinking skills Etc are addressed. As long as people are blindly ideological of any stripe. There can't be solidarity

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 17 hours ago

How do you address the material conditions of people who reject addressing the material conditions if it also helps someone who isn’t them.

I think the sort of help you're talking about is of political policy (ie free lunches at schools). I am speaking of direct action by volunteers (ie running a community pantry). When you engage in the community, conversations happen and that is when you can challenge biases in a non-confrontational setting.

If you cannot find solidarity in the masses then what is it you're looking for? A Vanguard party to reeducate the masses?

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

No not specifically. Again many of these people deny community with those they disagree with because of ideology. Though as someone pragmatically anarcho communist I do agree it is the better method. Working in communities.

The problem is how does one effectively address attacks facilitated through government? Is education reeducation? We're not talking about instilling any sort of ideology. I despise ideology generally. Vanguard parties specifically. We are talking about basic critical thinking skills. Checking and verifying sources. Not just blindly believing what others tell you.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago

How would you fix something that isn't broken?

I would respectfully disagree and point out that all of your well-considered points are in fact indicative that media in the US and to some other extent the rest of the world is very much broken.

And has been for well over 50 years.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world -1 points 15 hours ago

Then you should be able to provide relevant counter points to current events and the constant creep of sensationalist yellow journalism. Otherwise you're just disagreeing to disagree.

When it comes to mass media it's actually been this way far longer. The 50 years statement was in relation to just postwar propaganda output ala the red scare. It existed and was popular before that too. But I look forward to you actually posing something to actually disprove it other than "nuh uh".

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

Well, by “broken” I mean “Not being used in a manner befitting humankind”. That is to say, it’s been misused.

Relevant counterpoints to current events . . . I guess we could use some form of successfully beneficial online community and compare it to greatawakening.win or whatever the Qanuts are posting to these days.

There’s a huge lack of awareness about out thought and media correlate and it’s been that way since scholars and academics began treating it as a subject separate from philosophy or sociology.

this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
222 points (97.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2491 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS