The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
anonymousdata.medium.com
The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
1–10 of 40 posts
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#2Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#3Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
I just started posting on the Internet this year after many years of lurking, and I truly don't understand why a handful of people take such a negative tone without even reading what I wrote. Is there something specific you don't agree with?
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#4Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
Instead of a hostile tone you should write your own article that suggests otherwise.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#5Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
I just started posting on the Internet this year after many years of lurking, and I truly don't understand why a handful of people take such a negative tone without even reading what I wrote. Is there something specific you don't agree with?
I disagree with your lack of perspective. Its simply irresponsible to put normal people under the microscope like this instead of the political establishment that has wrought havoc over the last 60 years. Why not trace the genealogy of lies told by media companies owned by billionaires? The lies that start wars, destroy economies and pillage social trust? Surely that is more consequential than country bumpkins thinking bill gates is a lizard person.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#6Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
Disagreement with information and misinformation are not mutually exclusive.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#7Brought to you by pseudonymous medium writer "anonymousdatascientist"
Talks about people that he disagrees with as "dark cave creatures" and "weak intellectual immunity" - and we wonder why half the country is defensive and angered by the "educated" and "elite"?
He talks about Dr. Fauci in such high regard even though Fauci has admitted he deliberately lied to the American people in order to try to shape their behavior. Yet, won't even use the honorifics for Dr. Atlas or the President of the United States. What about Dr. Jill Biden, Mr. DataScientist - does she deserve her honorific according to your standard because her Ph.D is "only" in Education?
Good grief - incendiary, partisan trash like this does not belong on HN.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#8Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
"Please don't post unsubstantive flamebait, and please don't post supercilious dismissals." - dang
From the guidelines:
"Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community."
"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
"Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just started posting on the Internet this year after many years of lurking, and I truly don't understand why a handful of people take such a negative tone without even reading what I wrote. Is there something specific you don't agree with?
I disagree with your lack of perspective. Its simply irresponsible to put normal people under the microscope like this instead of the political establishment that has wrought havoc over the last 60 years. Why not trace the genealogy of lies told by media companies owned by billionaires? The lies that start wars, destroy economies and pillage social trust? Surely that is more consequential than country bumpkins thinki…
:-( seems like an intentional misreading of the content.
Re: The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler
#10Executive Summary: “The sources of misinformation that thrived in Parler” are anyone with whom “anonymousdatascientist” disagrees.
I just started posting on the Internet this year after many years of lurking, and I truly don't understand why a handful of people take such a negative tone without even reading what I wrote. Is there something specific you don't agree with?
It’s the pervasive high handed tone adopted by propagandists posing as journalists to manipulate readers. We see this propaganda language now usually signaled with phrases like “claims without evidence,” “misinformation,” “lies”... Then, the “journalist” provides no basis for their assertions, instead relying upon their status as journalists, when in fact they are propagandists usurping the role of journalists. Generally, logical fallacies like ad hominem or others follow to craft some desired narrative, never based on critical thinking. This article does just that. “Misinformation”? Says who?