Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 175 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#61

Post by ceejay »

ThomPete wrote: post #11

I don't believe he is in denial at all. In fact the article strikes me as more of the same reason why so many voted for Trump. The people who write these articles just can't accept the idea that people didn't vote for Trump unless they were tricked into it, or were fed lies. The idea that because they have a different reality they based their votes on never occurred to them. What fake news do is reinoforce what peopl…

I think there are fake stories that reinforce your current predisposition and then there are fake stories that a vulnerable human being reads and it takes their beliefs to the fringe.

Also, I have a hard time believing that seeing one or two stray bogus stories is the same as seeing bogus stories everywhere you care to look.

In one case a vulnerable human being might have enough reason to doubt what they're reading, and in the other case they suddenly feel like the world is caving in on them.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#63

Post by flockonus »

ThomPete wrote: post #30
splawn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a look at his comment history, that is Thom's MO. Trump being elected due to misinformation triggers the crap out of him for some reason.

What about making the case that it did happen because of misinformation instead of focusing on my comment history? I have said a lot of things on both sides and is hardly just some troll. We all have our triggers, this is one for me so whats wrong with that?

There is no such case to be made. If viral fake news influence even some tiny percentage, there is already responsibility on social media for how this elections turned out. Yes, quite possibly >90% of the people would have voted the same way regardless of news, still we all know the "swing" makes all the difference

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#65

Post by a_humean »

eggie wrote: post #56
a_humean wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except to be fair to the Dems and the Clinton campaign, they did have proposals and white papers addressing exactly these communities. For example, a proposal to invest $30 billion into coal mining communities within the Appalachia regions with promises for infrastructure investment and private business investment, and retraining former and current miners into new skilled occupations. Of course all of this pales in c…

I find it incredible that even living in the liberal echo chamber I never heard news about this proposal! I am even from Appalachia! Part of the problem is that those in the media forgot about people who are different from them--- for whom those $30 billion could have meant the difference between permanent regional decline and a new start.

Enjoy the read: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/11/1...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#66

Post by dkfmn »

gthtjtkt wrote: post #37
RankingMember wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT? Really? I would agree if you were describing Huffington Post or various other left-wing rags, but the NYT is pretty far from a Democratic Propaganda paper.

> the NYT is pretty far from a Democratic Propaganda paper. If that's true, why did the New York Times just apologize for their abysmal coverage of this election cycle? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-reader...

This isn't an apology. At best it's a promise to do better in the future.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#67

Post by [deleted] »

a_humean wrote: post #45
bluejekyll wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't get that sense from the article. It was all about influence. False stories influence people's opinions, and that may have encouraged voters to turn out or not for their candidate. There was a lot of false and misleading information distributed online during this election, and literally spoken by the candidates (one more than another). The biggest lie is actually at the heart of Trump's campaign, that he can…

Except to be fair to the Dems and the Clinton campaign, they did have proposals and white papers addressing exactly these communities. For example, a proposal to invest $30 billion into coal mining communities within the Appalachia regions with promises for infrastructure investment and private business investment, and retraining former and current miners into new skilled occupations. Of course all of this pales in c…

[deleted]

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#68

Post by bluejekyll »

ThomPete wrote: post #35
bluejekyll wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't get that sense from the article. It was all about influence. False stories influence people's opinions, and that may have encouraged voters to turn out or not for their candidate. There was a lot of false and misleading information distributed online during this election, and literally spoken by the candidates (one more than another). The biggest lie is actually at the heart of Trump's campaign, that he can…

I dont' believe he can bring them back either but it wasn't based on a lie and I am pretty sure he means it which is why he wants to dig into the resources and rebuild infrastructure. That does not make it a lie anymore than "yes we can" does.

Trump relied on one of the worst aspects of the Human existence, that someone else will fix your problems for you.

Giving people optimism about the future, bettering yours and everyone's existence is motivating for everyone. I believe this for anyone I've ever managed, and for any project I've ever worked on. People work better when they are optimistic.

"Yes, we can" is a motivational statement encouraging people to try. Trump's "make America great again" is based on some misguided notion of nastalgia. When is this period that that statement harkens back to?

Remember, the decades after WWII were great for the US because literally every other industrialized nation had been bombed so badly that they could barely make anything at all. America did well during this period because we had no competition.

So how do we go back to that?

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#69

Post by AJ007 »

bluejekyll wrote: post #27
ThomPete wrote: post #11

I don't believe he is in denial at all. In fact the article strikes me as more of the same reason why so many voted for Trump. The people who write these articles just can't accept the idea that people didn't vote for Trump unless they were tricked into it, or were fed lies. The idea that because they have a different reality they based their votes on never occurred to them. What fake news do is reinoforce what peopl…

I didn't get that sense from the article. It was all about influence. False stories influence people's opinions, and that may have encouraged voters to turn out or not for their candidate. There was a lot of false and misleading information distributed online during this election, and literally spoken by the candidates (one more than another). The biggest lie is actually at the heart of Trump's campaign, that he can…

Whether Trump or anyone can bring back jobs is subjective, and that is the biggest problem with separating "real" from "fake" - I don't believe it is possible to do without in any objective way at all.

The policies being proposed mean that the next time there is a leak, or stolen/hacked e-mail, the party involved can simply deny it is real and then the publisher would have to take the story offline or face some sort of negative weight or ban in Google and Facebook.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg Is in Denial

#70

Post by tomschlick »

gthtjtkt wrote: post #37
RankingMember wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT? Really? I would agree if you were describing Huffington Post or various other left-wing rags, but the NYT is pretty far from a Democratic Propaganda paper.

> the NYT is pretty far from a Democratic Propaganda paper. If that's true, why did the New York Times just apologize for their abysmal coverage of this election cycle? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/us/elections/to-our-reader...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY3nRgEZTm8

MSNBC laying into the NYT after the election for not accepting reality & criticizing people who said Trump even had the slightest chance at winning.

Post reply on HN