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

Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 964 posts

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#861

Post by CincinnatiMan »

shrimpx wrote: post #769
Grim-444 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They dont talk about or even cover the same things" - this is the number one fake news tactic in play. I'm not sure what to call it, but it's a 2x2 matrix - If a group is left-leaning, they'll report on everything good about the left and everything bad about the right, If a group is right-leaning, they'll report on everything good about the right and everything bad about the left. For example, you'll almost never se…

I don't mind that kind of bias, if your 2x2 matrix was right -- that each of them reports everything good about their side and everything bad about the other side. If that were true, you could sum them up and have a pretty balanced total news source. The problem with Fox News and CNN is the biased attitude. They report everything good as amazing and everything bad as horrible . The anchors are "performing" the news,…

I've noticed this "performance" in the NYT, but the WSJ news articles have mostly stayed pretty dry. Their opinion section however does not follow suit.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#862

Post by reedjosh »

reedjosh wrote: post #806
anshorei wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's what we call "strawmanning".

And bigotry. Wow... I could put together a nasty list of what conservative outlets preach about liberals too, but I don't actually believe the nonsense.

Downvoting now that the context I was responding to has been flagged is juvenille. C'mon people. The original post was ludicrous. And now you're downvoting only knowing I professed to be conservative.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#863

Post by heavyset_go »

fitzie wrote: post #836
boredprograming wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fox New's actual news coverage is mostly truthful. But a huge amount of their airtime is opinion pieces and media personalities who spout BS all day. Tucker Carlson is probably the most notorious. Plus they have Republican politicians calling in and showing up constantly, and they're allowed to say whatever they want.

people can hate on tucker all day long, as they attacked rush and oreilly before him, but tucker brings up issues that resonate in red america. he does a pretty fair job, which is evidenced by how trivial the criticism against him is. if people are confused about what red america thinks, they would be well served to look at Breitbart, tucker, and independent conservative outlets to see how they frame the discussion.…

> if people are confused about what red america thinks, they would be well served to look at Breitbart, tucker, and independent conservative outlets

I've been scolded for using Breitbart or Tucker Carlson as a barometer for right-wing positions because they're claimed to be extreme, or 'alt-right', and not reflective of how real conservatives think or feel.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#864

Post by ticviking »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #236
whimsicalism wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I would flip this and say that going to church weekly is not a necessary condition for being within Christian sphere of influence. Xmas is most certainly Christian.

Christian Christmas is Christian, but it is very different from Secular Christmas, which is practiced by Americans of all faiths as well as atheists and agnostics.

Beyond that different denominations celebrate very different Christmases. Compare midnight Mass of the nativity at a local catholic parish to the service at a local evangelical church to a mainline protestant church and they're very different.

What is depicted on film is clearly secular Christmas.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#865

Post by [deleted] »

nitrogen wrote: post #159
bpodgursky wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly Mormons are 2% of the US population (twice the Muslim %), and I can't think of a single openly Mormon character in any TV show I've ever seen.

There have been movies, such as The Other Side of Heaven. But as a former Mormon myself I think entertainment is more interesting if it focuses on what we have in common despite our differences, rather than focusing solely on amplifying differences.

[deleted]

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#866

Post by mlac »

true_religion wrote: post #860
ABCLAW wrote: post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If a policy is effective and correct, I would not call it extreme. >I guess it depends on the definition of extreme, but I would not think "good" policy would be extreme The issue is that you've begged the question in your definition: Good policy isn't extreme, therefore all policy that is extreme isn't good, therefore no extreme policy. You've just redefined extreme to mean bad - so we can't really discuss much mor…

The abolishment of slavery wasn’t an extreme positive position to take in pre civil war America. A truly extreme position would be granting non-white races equal rights up to and including the right to vote. Pennsylvania and New Jersey abolished slavery but walked back equal rights in voting after once passing laws to allow it. To contrast, the ideals of the slave holders were extreme. As for abolishing slavery, inte…

There is a ton of room for movement between or beside the two extremes that are usually associated with Democrats and Republicans. And one issue voters would be able to find those points to move forward if it wasn’t an all-or-nothing situation.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#867

Post by rayiner »

kthulutude wrote: post #737
TrispusAttucks wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. The center is the glue the holds the populace in check. We need these people. Once the center is eroded things will not go well.

Once the center is eroded things will not go well... for centrists. The idea that both 'extremes' are equivalently bad neglects the real differences in worldview that create a sense of political urgency. It's important to remember that this political urgency is a reflection of real social problems--for some people, the consequences are literally life and death.

> It's important to remember that this political urgency is a reflection of real social problems--for some people, the consequences are literally life and death.

That’s true for very few people. At the same time, injecting life-and-death urgency into politics deprives the vast majority of a sane and orderly society, which is extremely important as well.

Look, you’re not the first one to think that “politics is so serious we need to treat it extremely seriously.” I come from a part of the world where politics is “serious.” The Islamists are convinced that society must be dissolved and reformed as the Ummah. Others have dreams of creating a socialist secular utopia out of that same deeply Muslim community. For everyone it’s life or death business. (Especially in a third world country where poverty means that few people have much margin.) Elections are followed by rioting and mass protests. But this doesn’t actually lead to justice. Instead, it’s just animosity, unrest, and bitterness.

One of the things I loved about America, as an immigrant, was that elections were boring. I hate that my kids may never know that America and will have to grow up in this new one.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#868

Post by mlac »

ABCLAW wrote: post #704
mlac wrote: post #680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a policy is effective and correct, I would not call it extreme. I guess it depends on the definition of extreme, but I would not think "good" policy would be extreme in the sense that it has (whether real or perceived) negative externalities on a large portion of the population. Two years ago, I (and perhaps the country) would have said the PPP for paychecks would have been extreme. Given the (extreme) circumstanc…

>If a policy is effective and correct, I would not call it extreme. >I guess it depends on the definition of extreme, but I would not think "good" policy would be extreme The issue is that you've begged the question in your definition: Good policy isn't extreme, therefore all policy that is extreme isn't good, therefore no extreme policy. You've just redefined extreme to mean bad - so we can't really discuss much mor…

I say “good” in the sense of good policy, not the moral sense. Good policy should obviously be moral but needs to be tractable and not extreme.

So yes, I would say extreme policy is bad policy, because it leads to all sorts of unintended consequences. First, it’s extreme because of impacts to others. A policy wouldn’t be considered extreme if the vast majority of people agreed with it and it aligned with common sense. People often don’t agree with it because it impacts them in a negative way.

You can’t pass “extreme” policy that is extreme in the eyes of the voters without blowback of some kind and a massive swing the other way. So I’d make the argument that incremental progress would get more done in the long run. We don’t need massive change that will be unwound when one side loses control in a few years.

And the abolition of slavery, woman’s suffrage, and desegregation were not “extreme” things. They were ensuring the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for United States Citizens. They were progressive, but not extreme in their time.

And do you have reading on the relative velocity of legislative change? I’d like to see how it changed as tech evolved.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#869

Post by TrispusAttucks »

southeastern wrote: post #852
kthulutude wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once the center is eroded things will not go well... for centrists. The idea that both 'extremes' are equivalently bad neglects the real differences in worldview that create a sense of political urgency. It's important to remember that this political urgency is a reflection of real social problems--for some people, the consequences are literally life and death.

I agree. I think one way to demonstrate that is to consider a particularly contentious debate. Say, the Palestine-Israel conflict. If you're on the side of Palestine, agreeing with Israel only leads to more death and hate. If you're on the side of Israel, agreeing with Palestine only leads to more death and hate. The center doesn't know what to think-- it's complicated but it definitely needs to end. So the centrist…

False dichotomy. Strawman.

Just because someone is centrist doesn't mean they don't know what to think. It usually means they have a nuanced position on an issue that doesn't conveniently fit into a box that is red or blue.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#870

Post by sudosysgen »

hermitdev wrote: post #830
JAlexoid wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is especially true for foreign relations. Their latest issue literally has a massive article against vaccine nationalism. Their opposition to breaking of the Iranian deal. > A good barometer I have for journals as far as foreign policy is their coverage of the Iraq War before it began That's very arbitrary, considering that 18 years have passed. The Economist has changed hands and most of its staff. > 4 centri…

> That's very arbitrary, considering that 18 years have passed. Also, not specific enough. Which Iraq war? The one in 2000's? 90s? 80s?

The one in the 2000s, obviously.
Post reply on HN