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

Coronavirus and Credibility

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 968 posts

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#271

Post by zentiggr »

ryandrake wrote: post #201
basch wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>any amount of fact checking in politics don't change political views. That is what I was thinking. Paul is writing as if credibility stems from reality. When in reality, the reverse its true. Fox news is credible, its viewers believe that, and whatever those credible people say, is reality. As long as people keep tuned in only to Fox News, that reality wont shatter. Their credibility exists because of their reach, i…

This is a deliberately built political philosophy, one of the results of Karl Rove's "reality-based community" [1] idea, from over 15 years ago. Whether or not the label was actually coined by Rove is debated, but essentially this idea is that some people lived in a world that was "reality-based" and that others were not limited by reality and thus were better/stronger politicians. In practice, what this means is the…

I think the factor you missed in relating anything prior to the Trump era is the fact that Trump is an obvious, completely symptomatic Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

When he is back out of politics, watch for the other appointees to not just be replaced due to the change of president, but actively canned because they are all cronies appointed as a personality cult, and/or as favors to his worshipers.

And yes, I'm morbidly curious to imagine what the Trump presidential library might wind up containing. I snarkily predict that nothing will be approved except autobiographies.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#273

Post by AndrewBissell »

INGELRII wrote: post #82

> They didn't realize there was any danger in making false predictions. Is there any danger for them? PG seems to have very idealistic view of politics. As far as I know, any amount of fact checking in politics don't change political views. Will Fox News lose any viewers over this? Politicians may lose jobs because bad economy, but will they lose votes because they were wrong and ignorant? H. L. Mencken wrote: > No o…

Bear in mind it's not just Fox News which got this pandemic wrong. "It's no worse than the flu," "this won't be a global pandemic," "you don't need to wear a mask unless you are symptomatic or caring for someone who is," and other 100% wrong takes were also pushed by Vox, NYT, WaPo, and even WHO & CDC long past when they should have been.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#275

Post by drocer88 »

If you're getting your "news" from CNN/Fox/MSNBC, or "gathering evidence" to promote one the two permitted narratives, that's your problem. This is stuff is low effort "Presidential Level Politics" 24x7. Real news died when reporters stopped having to craft a story so that the Associated Press or United Press International picked it up and made it available to the varied local newspapers of America, both liberal and conservative. The old CNN that actually did news, not talk show shenanigans reminiscent of old school Howard Stern, is missed.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#276

Post by nxp »

Yes Minister, on how to respond to a crisis:

  Sir Richard Wharton: “In stage one, we say nothing is going to happen.”

  Sir Humphrey Appleby: “Stage two, we say something may be about to happen,
                         but we should do nothing about it.”

  Sir Richard Wharton: “In stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it,
                        but there’s nothing we can do.”

  Sir Humphrey Appleby: “Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done,
                         but it’s too late now.”
Remember that Yes Minister is a manual for politicians, not a comedy.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#277

Post by takeda »

rmu09 wrote: post #24
martinko wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the conspiracy theories out there, the 'caused by 5G masts' is the one that confuses me the most. I get the possible aversion to 5G, but how does one make the leap from that to it causing COVID?

IMO this is deliberate mis-information, some type of info-guerilla, to stir and channel anger against the establishment.

Yep, this also comes packaged with NWO, there is one country that actively works on spreading this crap on social media, I believe the goal is to weaken Western countries by setting up their citizens against their own government.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#278

Post by AndrewBissell »

nradov wrote: post #269
graeme wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happened over a longer timescale with the Iraq War too. Pretty much everyone who was right remained marginal. Those who were prominently wrong became more prominent.

Barack Obama wasn't exactly marginal.

Obama lucked out that he didn't have to cast an actual vote on the Iraq War due to vicissitudes of his congressional career; based on how he actually governed and the allegiances he has demonstrated, we can reasonably guess he would have voted in favor. He also cemented our endless imperial interventionism in the broader Middle East including with an absolutely disastrous campaign in Libya. And, just like George W. Bush and his lackeys, paid zero price for it.

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#279

Post by the_af »

zzzcpan wrote: post #154
david_w wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What's amusing to be is how anyone can look at the incompetence of governments across the world, and conclude they'd be capable of any kind of organized conspiracy against the general population." Tell that to the Jews in Deutchland circa 1931... Tell that to the Kulaks in the Ukraine in 1930 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor , Tell that to the educated classes in China under Mao; https://www.globalsecurity.or…

Technically the government itself is a form of conspiracy against the general population. But people don't know that, even educated people, because political science isn't mandatory in higher education. But labeling something as conspiracy theory is a useful tool to silence discussions about all the evil governments and large organizations do.

> Technically the government itself is a form of conspiracy against the general population

"Technically" in which sense? Which political science course taught you that? Or are you referring to some specific government?

Re: Coronavirus and Credibility

#280

Post by arkades »

INGELRII wrote: post #82

> They didn't realize there was any danger in making false predictions. Is there any danger for them? PG seems to have very idealistic view of politics. As far as I know, any amount of fact checking in politics don't change political views. Will Fox News lose any viewers over this? Politicians may lose jobs because bad economy, but will they lose votes because they were wrong and ignorant? H. L. Mencken wrote: > No o…

I think you misread the passage that you quote as supporting idealism. The full passage is:

"The answer, I realized, is that they didn't think they could get caught. They didn't realize there was any danger in making false predictions. These people constantly make false predictions, and get away with it, because the things they make predictions about either have mushy enough outcomes that they can bluster their way out of trouble, or happen so far in the future that few remember what they said."

Making a false prediction on the premise that you can bluster your way out of it doesn't indicate that they think the false prediction doesn't have consequences - it indicates that they think the false prediction doesn't have consequences for them. That they can get away with it. It's "I can say what I want, because nothing bad will happen to me personally for lying."

I wouldn't call that idealism.

Post reply on HN