Clip shows misinformation still has a home on Facebook

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 25, 2019, 2:52 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #16

asveikau wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (I'm not American so I don't know who she is, I guess the continuation of Clinton?) She has represented San Francisco in the US congress since the late 80s, and has been in national democratic congressional leadership for about 20 years, so, legislative rather than executive. For that same 20ish years Republicans have been trying to use her as a symbol of vilification in various media or campaign material, in my op…

> For that same 20ish years Republicans have been trying to use her as a symbol of vilification in various media or campaign material, in my opinion it's all very over the top. Both sides are guilty of smear campaigns. One little flub or gaffe and a video taking it out of context will start circulating. Just go to /r/politics if you want examples of the left smearing the right

Post by wbronitsky » Sat, May 25, 2019, 2:54 PM UTC

abootstrapper wrote: post #15

ekianjo wrote: post #5

> Misrepresented occurrences such as this are used to energise lies that have bubbled around in the far reaches of the internet for a while, waiting for their moment. You don't need to wait for the Internet, most large media groups are propaganda tools for their own political side. No need to do any "deep fake", "selective editing" is all that's needed to take things out of context and publish a different narrative b…

This is not biased news. It is absolutely fake being passed as true. Not Donald Trump’s definition of fake (news you don’t like), but actually not factual. The two are not equivalent. Pizza gate is not real, the earth is not flat, vaccines do not cause autism. These and other false claims are being passed off as facts by a few bad actors and propagated through fake accounts to sow discontent. It’s working, and it has…

Post by OrangeManBad » Sat, May 25, 2019, 3:01 PM UTC

3JPLW wrote: post #23

umvi wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For that same 20ish years Republicans have been trying to use her as a symbol of vilification in various media or campaign material, in my opinion it's all very over the top. Both sides are guilty of smear campaigns. One little flub or gaffe and a video taking it out of context will start circulating. Just go to /r/politics if you want examples of the left smearing the right

Have Democratic presidents ever tweeted/emailed/promoted/sent out doctored videos that make their rivals look bad?

Post by asveikau » Sat, May 25, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

OrangeManBad wrote: post #26

3JPLW wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have Democratic presidents ever tweeted/emailed/promoted/sent out doctored videos that make their rivals look bad?

The video Orange man posted on twitter wasn't doctored. Media has changed the definition of doctored to suit them. It was edited to show only relevant parts but there was nothing fake about it. Why not let media show the original so called undoctored version?

Post by ekianjo » Sat, May 25, 2019, 3:17 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #20

ekianjo wrote: post #5

> Misrepresented occurrences such as this are used to energise lies that have bubbled around in the far reaches of the internet for a while, waiting for their moment. You don't need to wait for the Internet, most large media groups are propaganda tools for their own political side. No need to do any "deep fake", "selective editing" is all that's needed to take things out of context and publish a different narrative b…

Sorry, do you have an example of a "large media group" "selectively editing" a video to make someone look drunk for the purposes of propaganda? Anything equivalent? This sounds like a clever attempt to "both sides do it" a way out of actually admitting that this video and its pushing by a bunch of partisans (right up to and including the office of the President of the United States) was awful. You agree this is awful…