Live data from Hacker News

The Bullshit

walterkirn.substack.com

151–160 of 214 posts

Re: The Bullshit

#151
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In response to something you didn't actually say - news is a classic example of when a free market may be bad, but all the alternatives people tried were much worse! And on what you did say - total agreement. The news has always been terrible. The internet has brought the cost of broadcasting so low actual honest or expert opinions and can make it out as well as the orthodoxies of people who can afford media companie…

Edit: I'm sorry for the lengthy post, but I felt giving rough examples was necessary to convey the point. It's true that some unofficial quality voices are disrupting established narratives ... but I'm sorry to say this isn't the shift that matters, because 99% of the 'unofficial sources' are considerably worse than just 'bullshit' in the press. The 'Giant Kraken Monster' of fake news is really shocking, and it's tak…

But that's how the far right operates.

1. Use narrative engineering to persuade angry, frightened, gullible people to tune in and self-select.

2. Use narrative reinforcement to make them angrier and more frightened.

3. Wind them up and point them at a target.

4. Profit politically, and possibly also financially.

It doesn't matter what the narrative is. As long as it has an outgroup that can be accused of doing terrible things that arouse fear, rage, and disgust, almost any narrative will do. It could be vax conspiracies, it could be election conspiracies, it could be any number of other hot-button topics.

It's no different to how official propaganda works. [1] It isn't even all that different to conventional advertising.

The only difference now is that it portrays itself as covert, revolutionary, transgressive, and individualistic, where during the glory days of Time it used to present itself as wise, objective, and paternal.

But in fact it's just the same old farmed behaviour modification reinvented for social media.

[1] The suggestion that there was ever any kind of benign separation between old-fashioned patrician journalism and the US establishment is itself obvious bullshit. Historians have written books about this. This is just one intro.

http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php

Re: The Bullshit

#152
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why you think "I worked around a newsroom for 13 years" is a good rebuttal to the fairly trivial claim that most professionals chose said profession because they wanted to do it.

Well, maybe it's because he replied to ME and I made specific claims that he decided to doubt. Now maybe in this brave new world, some people don't consider actual lived experience to be worth a whole lot, but that's not my problem. The associate editor at the paper I did work for was making $13.50 an hour as of two years ago when I left. I know this because she overheard a conversation regarding the salary of my sub…

You're still missing the point that people tell almost identical stories for just about every profession in existence. The user that replied to you wasn't even doubting you, they were just saying that it's not special.

Re: The Bullshit

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: I'm sorry for the lengthy post, but I felt giving rough examples was necessary to convey the point. It's true that some unofficial quality voices are disrupting established narratives ... but I'm sorry to say this isn't the shift that matters, because 99% of the 'unofficial sources' are considerably worse than just 'bullshit' in the press. The 'Giant Kraken Monster' of fake news is really shocking, and it's tak…

But that's how the far right operates. 1. Use narrative engineering to persuade angry, frightened, gullible people to tune in and self-select. 2. Use narrative reinforcement to make them angrier and more frightened. 3. Wind them up and point them at a target. 4. Profit politically, and possibly also financially. It doesn't matter what the narrative is. As long as it has an outgroup that can be accused of doing terrib…

Why only the far right?

Isn't this what everyone does now?

Is there actually a "pure" movement or source that doesn't engage in this kind of Bullshit?

Re: The Bullshit

#154
The media has been notoriously lying for quite some time. Whether actively (I recently heard a story of some news anchors paying off some guys with Kalashnikovs to start shooting when their live segment on TV came up because the armed strife they were reporting on wasn't quite real enough) or passively (swallowing someone else's propaganda as if it were a fact), there has been bullshit floating around the media for decades. I think back in the day it was in some ways harder to spot - your only other frame of reference was the observable reality around you. So for instance when (in my parents time in a communist country) the TV reported that the shoe factory was exceeding its planned output by 140%, but when you went to the shop there were no shoes in your size and a line around the block you could put two and two together. But many news stories evade such simple comparisons with daily reality. Today we have the internet where both alternative facts are available (i.e. people actually on the scene taking pictures) as well as alternative journalism piecing those facts together in a completely different way. Most clever people try to triangulate between these different viewpoints to arrive at some conclusion hopefully closer to reality...

The interesting question is what are the consequence of this? I think there is a rapidly shrinking pool of trust towards our institutions and corporations. I believe that a lot of the issues with the coronavirus (especially the vaccines) are directly attributable to this. If someone who has been blatantly lying to you for decades tells you "take this medication, it's safe, trust me" and keeps repeating it over and over again, I think one can sympathise with those who feel entirely suspicious about it.

Re: The Bullshit

#155
post #149
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR has an implicit assumption in ~every story that a problem is best addressed by government intervention and spending. They're credulous of any claim an "authority" makes. Two quick examples from npr.org right now: 1. Somehow we can model how the economy can adapt to zero carbon in 40 years yet couldn't predict changes to solar PV becoming more affordable in the last ten: https://www.npr.org/2021/08/14/1027370891/c…

And another acting as if an exorcism was a real thing: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/07/30/4249800... It's more benign than qanon. I haven't checked their coverage of mask wearing. I'll change my mind if they were pushing masks when Fauci was lying and saying they were unnecessary.

The key line in this story might be:

> Father Syquia leads a team of four priests who get additional assistance from volunteers: psychiatrists, doctors, lawyers and laypeople.

There seem to be some trained professionals hidden behind the show and prayers.

Re: The Bullshit

#156
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In response to something you didn't actually say - news is a classic example of when a free market may be bad, but all the alternatives people tried were much worse! And on what you did say - total agreement. The news has always been terrible. The internet has brought the cost of broadcasting so low actual honest or expert opinions and can make it out as well as the orthodoxies of people who can afford media companie…

I always thought PBS and NPR were pretty good. What am I missing?

According to the author's examples of bullshit, NPR peddles the same stuff as the other for-profit main stream publications.

> Immerse yourself in news of Russian plots to counterfeit presidential children’s laptops [0], viruses spawned in Wuhan market stalls [1], vast secret legions of domestic terrorists flashing one another the OK sign in shadowy parking lots [2] behind Bass Pro Shops experiencing “temporary” inflation [3], and patriotic tech conglomerates purging the commons of untruths.

I listed to them for years but noticed a considerable shift in their reporting in the last 2-3 years.

[0] https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924506867/analysis-questionab...

[1] https://www.npr.org/2020/01/29/800725826/why-wet-markets-are...

[2] https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2021/01/15/957421470...

[3] https://www.npr.org/2021/07/17/1017264502/the-federal-reserv...

[4] https://www.npr.org/transcripts/959667930

Re: The Bullshit

#157

The trouble with news today is that the ratio of publicity and punditry to data collected in the field is too high. Try to find out what's happening in Kabul right now. What have we got? Vast amounts of commentary are available, all resting on a very narrow base of facts. There's a little bit of cell phone video leaking out. Large numbers of people at the airport, out on the tarmac, hanging around planes that aren't…

I don’t have to watch the coverage to also know they’re not going to talk about the wider context in any useful way. No real insight into why the taliban saw so little opposition, no discussion of how drug money underpins much of their power and what the geopolitical ramifications of that are, no reflection of why the major international governmental bodies are unwilling or unable to go to afghanistan and other places and protect human rights, and how we could reform the system of the world to actually be capable of protecting human rights. In short, all we’re going to get is a lot of poorly informed discussion of what is going on right there right now, which is probably the least important aspect of this whole situation for anyone not actually living there.

Re: The Bullshit

#158
Where do I pay to see the rest of the headline? These trickle and dime outfits have taken it to the point where I expect clickbait in one word or fewer.

Re: The Bullshit

#159
post #54

> but it isn’t the news and it hasn’t been for ages. I have a better idea. The news has always been shit. There's this weird fetish with "freedom of the press" that distorts the fact that news is still a business, run by free market forces, with the same distributions of incompetence and corruption as any free market. It used to be the "nightly news", but we now have a 24/7 always-on consumption culture and news orgs…

In response to something you didn't actually say - news is a classic example of when a free market may be bad, but all the alternatives people tried were much worse! And on what you did say - total agreement. The news has always been terrible. The internet has brought the cost of broadcasting so low actual honest or expert opinions and can make it out as well as the orthodoxies of people who can afford media companie…

> but all the alternatives people tried were much worse

where alternatives tried? or just quickly squashed?

Re: The Bullshit

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: I'm sorry for the lengthy post, but I felt giving rough examples was necessary to convey the point. It's true that some unofficial quality voices are disrupting established narratives ... but I'm sorry to say this isn't the shift that matters, because 99% of the 'unofficial sources' are considerably worse than just 'bullshit' in the press. The 'Giant Kraken Monster' of fake news is really shocking, and it's tak…

Why is this downvoted? "Official" news may not be perfect but it is without doubt that most alternatives are way worse.

Far worse, I'm not sure..

I remember when France went to war against Khadafi our newspapers/TVs were all supporting this, given the amount of direct suffering it caused I'd say that being worse than this is .. hard!

Post reply on HN