111–120 of 142 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Classism is certainly a thing, and that’s unfortunate, but it’s also really hard to deal with people who see in black-and-whites without appearing condescending, because almost everything is extremely complicated.
Am I though? You seem to outline a very black-and-white choice ahead of you, to be good/evil.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But that's the job of a journalist... to create controversies where there are none. To divide society to get you hooked on news. Is it, though? Does every journalist really "create controversies where there are none?" Is every news story really an attempt to "divide society to get you hooked on news?" Do you also believe meteorologists gin up their weather forecasts with storms for better ratings? Don't confuse cyn…
Regarding meteorologists “ginning it up”: maybe not to the degree of making storms up, but here’s a recent, widely covered example of sensational reporting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/09/...
It's like saying all bankers are greedy, all politicians are corrupt, all doctors are stooges for big pharma, all police are psychopaths, etc. Maximal cynicism and minimal insight... it gets tedious after a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, this is also how elite enables those who abuse power as long as those mistreated are not part of elite. This how and why bullies and abusers keep and gain powerful positions. This is how sexual assault becomes sex scandal and this is why Jerry Sandusky could abuse so many boys. This is how outright self-serving lies become part of consensus. This works the way you described because those people have li…
I think it’s the last bit. That people don’t participate. I can’t remeber how many hearings we’ve done on changes that got nothing but crackpot replies because no regular folks want to spend time participating in the society they live in anymore. Only in one area do people actually take action, schools. If we close down a school, for various reasons but typically efficiency (money), parents will open a new private sc…
Practically, lets say you are someone badly affected by that policy and attempt to participate. Your attempt to accurately describe how exactly it affects you, will make you seen as rude and inappropriate. You are trouble and will be treated as such.
Another part: "In public it’s different, here you’ll sometimes get heated for the audience, but you’ll still be beat friends once the cameras stop rolling."
Practically, if you attempt to participate, you will be show some spectacle of disagreement and conflict. Which is just show for audience, after which everyone will be back to euphemisms, sugar coating and nothing will change. Because it was show and none of it matters.
----------------
Locals who did not wanted local schools closed There were protests of locals in various American cities. They participated. Backroom deals won.
" you know that you could leave at any time and you know that you will not." I have no problem. The press needs to take more responsibility for this as they are the primary enablers of Twitter. Tweets are presented all the time in articles as expression of legitimate opinion, and often used as the basis for some kind of rally bad straw-man argument the author wants to make. I think Twitter will wane but it won't go a…
The only people I know with twitter accounts are journalists. One friend in particular has a hard time understanding how you can function without twitter. I tried using it, like most people, but when you work a job that doesn’t involve trolling the internet for news, it’s really hard to use twitter in any meaningful manner. You’ll post something and a few days later you’ll have time to post a reply. Or you’ll follow…
Twitter is completely fine and usable even if you only check it every few days, or only during your morning commute. Some people I know use Twitter maybe one day a month on average. I have no idea why you think you need to see everything on/constantly be on Twitter to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding meteorologists “ginning it up”: maybe not to the degree of making storms up, but here’s a recent, widely covered example of sensational reporting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/09/...
Sure, but that doesn't prove that the purpose of weather reporting is to alter forecasts for dramatic effect, just as the existence of sensationalist reporting doesn't justify the claim that the purpose of journalism is to divide society, advance political agendas and get people hooked on news. The effect of a process is not necessarily its purpose , nor the purpose of those involved in that process. It's like saying…
“Enragement is engagement.” Social media is full of hot air and a lot of people producing nothing. Who cares. Most of the tweets on twitter are written by a tiny minority of people who like to hate or judge rather than act. Quit social media and leave that crowd to waste their time whilst you build something that actually improves the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many ways to use Twitter that aren't social media per se and which are useful. I work with a school and they Tweet out stuff bout what is happening at the school, photos of student activities, etc which parents love. They tweet out thanks to organisations that they are working with or who have come to visit. People working there follow the Twitter accounts of education specialists, regulators, other schools…
I’m European, so using twitter in that way would be really illegal. Having children of my own, I’m really happy they weren’t shared on an American social media-platform for the entire world to see. We do have digital platforms for sharing stuff like that, but they are operated by the schools and the data is encrypted, access locked to the correct parties and the data is t kept forever. That way, you can actually also…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I though? You seem to outline a very black-and-white choice ahead of you, to be good/evil.
For someone stating that everything is very complicated, that's an incredibly reductionist take on my rather long comment.
I mean, I’m sure you didn’t mean these things exactly like I interpret them now, and I am taking what you said extremely literal.
I’m sure you had a miserable time, but how do you suggest we change that for other people, when your own solution seem to be chosing whether or not to be a good person. I mean, do you really think being a terrible person gives you advantages in life?
Maybe in some areas it does, and maybe for some periods of time, but it usually catches up to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For someone stating that everything is very complicated, that's an incredibly reductionist take on my rather long comment.
Well, you also saw society as something you’re either in/out of. You view us as elitarian/non-elitarian. If someone aren’t respected or have a hard time getting heard, it’s a complete waste for them. You either have high morals or not. You think you know the motivation behind the people who mistreated you, and define them as evil. You think that everyone participating in the system are evil. I mean, I’m sure you didn…
You are being incredibly dismissive and going out of your way to turn my comment into something black and white when it isn't. You aren't taking what I said extremely literally. You are wildly twisting what I said.
This is not good faith engagement and I don't see any point in trying to clarify anything. I will note you are focused overly much on the things I said about me, which is a common outcome and problematic form of engagement that actively makes it harder for anyone who is not part of the "in crowd" to participate. You seem to have completely glossed over and ignored anything I said about, for example, most people simply not knowing better answers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s the last bit. That people don’t participate. I can’t remeber how many hearings we’ve done on changes that got nothing but crackpot replies because no regular folks want to spend time participating in the society they live in anymore. Only in one area do people actually take action, schools. If we close down a school, for various reasons but typically efficiency (money), parents will open a new private sc…
It is not just that. Listen what exactly he wrote: "If you want to say that you think something is a bad idea, you sugarcoat it to hell and back, focusing first on complimenting your counterpart on where you think they are successful." Practically, lets say you are someone badly affected by that policy and attempt to participate. Your attempt to accurately describe how exactly it affects you, will make you seen as ru…
If you want real change, then you can’t just complain for a few days after something shitty happens. You gotta get out there and work for change.
The school is a good example. If our parents protested instead of using the system to open private schools then the schools would probably have been closed. The parents would’ve been angry, but they probably wouldn’t have voted that differently.
Instead they actually build a school within the rules, something which isn’t easy and can’t be done in a few days, and as a result they got their change. The change came at a cost of course, schools aren’t closed for the fun of it, so maybe the elderly get their houses cleaned less as a result, but they still made the change and they wouldn’t have if they hadn’t read the rules and done the hard work.
It’s easy to protest, but it’s also extremely easy to ignore, and often rightly so, because complaining offers no alternatives.
I’m not saying protests can’t change things though, but you need a majority to protest for a long while.