171–180 of 271 posts
Remember this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15790687 To some extent it's still going on. Protests are still happening (and it's really bad) so lately I've been noticing a bunch of - what I think are - shill accounts. Couple of days before I went through some of the posts in news post about the protests and identified several profiles with no personal pictures, no posts, posting in broken Romanian about: - ant…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite honestly, in the past 10 or so years, the Republican party has made itself extremely easy to dump on. More so than the media leaning "left", I think they lean populist. Human interest stories, people falling on hard luck, natural disasters, terrorism. Some of these things 'feel' left-leaning, some 'feel' right-leaning.
>Quite honestly, in the past 10 or so years, the Republican party has made itself extremely easy to dump on. Quite the opposite actually. As the contemporary left has taken over mainstream culture and turned into the de facto "establishment" that it originally railed against, it's grown intellectually soft and dishonest. Both sides play to populist emotional appeals and sentiments, but the left-wing outrage industry…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that one. I stand by my criticism, and I accuse you of the very thing that you are accusing me of. If you want me to go in depth, I will. If anything, I restrained myself in addressing that asinine article. It opens with: >"But having been marred by gang violence in recent years, this J’ouvert was markedly different, as The New York Times described. The event, which derives its name from a Creole term for “daybr…
So your first complaint is that the phrase "having been marred by gang violence in recent years" doesn't fully express that the violence included "multiple stabbings" and "homicides." Uh, that's what gang violence usually entails: stabbings, shootings, and murder. You chalk that up to the writer intentionally ("conveniently") omitting that. Then you cite the NY Post, widely acknowledged as a sensational tabloid, pres…
>Then, you take fault with the author expressing their opinion that the festival had "an overwhelming show of force.
No, I take issue with the authors insinuation that it wasn't warranted, hence:
"overwhelming show of force in response to a comparatively small number of bad actors."
>Is that all the author complained about in this respect?
Have you actually read the article? It's probably one silliest pieces of journalism I've ever read. Just read something of quotes:
>“The gentrifiers are not wanting to share—they’re wanting to take over.” One of the tools they can use to take over public spaces, he argues, is law enforcement.
Yes, law enforcement is a tool of the "gentrifiers" to move poor people out. This is ridiculous.
It's not the crimes that are the problem (homicides, assaults, drug dealing, public intoxication), but rather the "criminalization" of the criminals.
I guess the solution is just stop calling the cops?
>If this is the awful, biased "liberal" media you're worried about, you should probably stick to the Post. That way all of your existing biases can be reinforced.
Okay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of these conditions look to be along the lines of, "if you're going to use military property or equipment to film your movie, you don't get to turn around and disparage the military", which has done nothing to stem the tide of Hollywood films explicitly designed to disparage the military.
Can you please give me a list of recent -- or ANY -- Hollywood films that are explicitly designed to disparage the military? That is a BOLD claim and I'd love to learn more.
Ah Facebook... I stumbled upon a con artist's account on Facebook once. And I couldn't find any way to report it as a scam.
Remember this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15790687 To some extent it's still going on. Protests are still happening (and it's really bad) so lately I've been noticing a bunch of - what I think are - shill accounts. Couple of days before I went through some of the posts in news post about the protests and identified several profiles with no personal pictures, no posts, posting in broken Romanian about: - ant…
Persona Management software is a real thing. This link is from 6 years ago. In the past 5 years, I'm sure it's been refined and weaponized. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-op...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/05/europe-vladimi...
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/10/rus...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/05/11/i...
Imagine if ABC/CBS/NBC actively went to political parties and sold them on buying their way into the scripts of the top prime-time sitcoms to shape the opinion of viewers. That's essentially what Facebook is doing out in the open.
Imagine... If somebody like Rush Limbaugh had a nationwide radio show where day by day he created content based on RNC talking points. Or a network like Fox or MSNBC went all in on party loyalty and based all their content on party talking points. Or a media conglomerate like Sinclair or Clear Channel pushed out political messaging to their affiliates in small markets that had to be aired during prime viewership. oh…
Note: If you don’t believe it, try to listen to conversations in uncensored areas, places where there’s no social push to behave in a certain way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Parks and Rec ran for seven seasons, and its protagonist was a fictionalized Hillary Clinton. The West Wing ran for seven seasons and explicitly featured a Democratic Presidential administration.
A fictionalized Hillary Clinton? That's... quite a leap. You could easily argue Robin Wright plays a fictionalized Hillary Clinton on "House of Cards." Personally, I think that the free market that the conservatives love to salivate about is making this happen. It cracks me up to imagine Hollywood producers saying "Well, I COULD make more money by making a super-conservative show but I just NEED to get my liberal vie…
The show also started around the same time as her incredibly popular tenure as Secretary of State.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I don't think it's a really bad thing. Who in their right mind would? Uppity liberals and fringe left-wing protesters affiliated with various left-wing identitarian groups. The rest of us, rich, poor, middle-class, black, white, whatever, would prefer our neighborhoods to be safe, and not filled with gang violence and drugs. But this doesn't fit their narrative, so here we are.
So, in your world, there are: * uppity liberals and fringe left-wing protestors * "the rest of us" Interesting. Lots of people on both sides of the aisle admit that there are uppity conservatives and fringe right-wing protestors, but you neglected to mention them. Do you feel that you're "in the middle" and not a conservative?
I was painting broadly the social demographic of the people that push this sort of nonsense - it usually is uppity liberals and fringe radicals.
People who actually care about their neighborhoods call the police when there are homicides, drug dealing, and violence occurring.
> there are uppity conservatives and fringe right-wing protestors
Yes, and I'm one of those uppity conservatives. I hold the fringe right-wing guys in contempt, but I don't see the relevance? If you want me to rail on them, I will gladly.
>Do you feel that you're "in the middle" and not a conservative?
Libertarian I guess? Grew up in a poor neighborhood much like the one described in the article, so I feel quite strongly about this sort of stuff. A larger police presence would have been a gift from God.