413 private links
Harris also once again placed January 6th above 9/11 and the OKC bombing as the “worst attack on our democracy.” //
henrybowman | September 17, 2024 at 8:30 pm
“(Please do not forget the OKC bombing. I get why 9/11 receives the most attention but do not forget the 1995 OKC bombing.)”
When I started out collecting data as a 2A activist in the late ’80s, the largest mass murder on US soil was the Happyland Social Club fire, an arsonist with a jar of gasoline.
Then came Waco.
Then came OKC.
Then came 9/11.
Then came COVID (much less qualifiable, but clearly the record-holder).
In a country with 250 years of history, all this escalation in just 30 years. My God.
You’ll notice that NONE of these mass murders were committed with guns… but at least two of them — the ones that involved housewives and children — were committed by our own government.
Government democide — entirely exclusive of wartime deaths — has killed more humans than all wars combined. //
TargaGTS in reply to henrybowman. | September 17, 2024 at 8:59 pm
I forgot about the Happyland fire…probably because no one in the media brings it up anymore. I would add that the worst school spree murder happened way back in the 1920 or early 1930, the Bath School Massacre, which was also perpetrated entirely by firebombing. Close to 40-dead (mostly children) and another 60(ish) injured. I’m always fearful firebombing might come back into vogue again.
CNN’s Daniel Dale has done the unthinkable. He took aim at @KamalaHQ, the official rapid response page on X for Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign. With over 1.3 million followers, the account has a wide reach, and according to Dale, “has made a habit of misleadingly clipping and inaccurately captioning video clips to attack former President Donald Trump.”
The account has been “repeatedly deceptive” and has made “inaccurate comments on multiple occasions,” Dale wrote. And he goes on to detail eight of the account’s most disingenuous posts from the last month.
The problem with all the mockery was that Trump's claim was true, as evidenced by an article from CNN of all places, that had been published the day before the debate, and which detailed Harris' answers to a 2019 ACLU questionnaire: https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/08/Harris-ACLU-Candidate-Questionnaire.pdf //
To make matters worse, Free Beacon reporter Joe Gabriel Simonson added on Twitter that "In a subsequent exchange, Glasser’s editor said the New Yorker does not 'see a need to issue a correction.'"
That news headline about presidential candidate Kamala Harris on your Google search results? It may have been written by her campaign.
Harris' team has been launching sponsored posts on Google that link to real news content from various publishers but feature customized headlines and descriptions crafted by her campaign, a practice experts and Google called "common." One sponsored ad that links to NPR’s website features the headline “Harris will Lower Health Costs.” Another that links to the Associated Press reads “VP Harris’s Economic Vision - Lower Costs and Higher Wages.” The advertisements were first reported by Axios.
While these sponsored posts have been used by other campaigns and comply with Google’s policies, some marketing experts worry they could fuel misinformation and distrust in the media. //
Google's ad transparency center shows a number of other publishers featured in Harris ads, including Reuters, Time, CNN, AP, the Independent, the Guardian and USA TODAY.
"We were not aware the Harris campaign was using our content in this manner,” said Lark-Marie Anton, spokesperson for USA TODAY parent company Gannett. “As a news organization, we are committed to ensuring that our stories are shared appropriately, adhering to the highest standards of integrity and accuracy." //
The Harris campaign declined to comment for this story. Donald Trump's campaign did not return a request for comment, but Google's ad transparency center did not show these types of ads from the former president's campaign. //
But even with a sponsored tag, the ads present a “significant ethical concern,” according to Colin Campbell, associate professor of marketing at the University of San Diego.
He said this is especially true when consumers fail to differentiate online ads.
“Many consumers might form opinions based solely on the altered headlines, without ever reading the actual articles,” Campbell said. “Even those who click through and read the articles may feel misled when they notice the discrepancy between the headline and the content, further eroding trust in the media.”
It’s always nice when a member of the establishment media actually gets it. Columnist Megan McArdle wrote an op-ed taking the misinformation/disinformation industry to task for a series of sins that explain why they have not been able to accomplish their objectives.
And what are those objectives?
Attacking former President Donald Trump and the right, of course. //
The reason the misinformation/disinformation industry failed to harm Trump is because it was so obvious that this was their entire mission. Even though they tried to disguise their aims under a veneer of a desire for accuracy, it was evident that they were motivated more by politics than a desire to make sure people are properly informed on the issues.
As McArdle highlighted – the bulk of their “fact-checking” went in only one political direction. It was rare for these intrepid seekers of truth to correct any of the long list of falsehoods coming from the left. It was as if they weren’t even trying to hide their bias. //
Members of the misinformation industry would have been smart to at least pretend to care about debunking false narratives on both sides by also going after folks on the left who propagated falsehoods in public spaces.
But they didn’t. This is why they continue to fail. //
GBenton
13 hours ago
McArdle is blinded by her bigotry toward Trump. Those weren't errors, no. The fact checkers lied.
but she doesn't ask why or connect the dots.
they had to lie in a coordinated conspiracy because Trump was revealing the truth and threatening the status quo, of which McArdle is a beneficiary.
Trump represents real reform and those who hate him most have something to lose if the corrupt status quo ends.
The purpose of fscr checkers is to enable leftist misinformation and hide the truth.
The Kamala Harris campaign has been editing press headlines and putting the fake versions in ads as a way to spread disinformation. That's according to a new report that found multiple instances of Google ads being manipulated without the consent of the various news organizations linked to the false headlines.
Jim VandeHei @JimVandeHei
·
🚨🚨 The Harris campaign has been editing news headlines and descriptions within Google search ads that make it appear as if the Guardian, Reuters, CBS News and other major publishers are on her side, Axios has found.
axios.com
Harris-sponsored Google ads suggest publishers are on her side
3:35 PM · Aug 13, 2024 //
There is no doubt in my mind that this would be a major scandal if the Trump campaign were involved. Could you imagine the screams of "disinformation" and threatened lawsuits from press organizations? It'd be non-stop. Because it's Harris, though, it's no big deal. //
Bonchie @bonchieredstate
·
Yesterday, Sara Fischer of Axios threw a fit on CNN over “disinformation” and Elon Musk allowing Trump to “say whatever he wants.”
Today, she’s hand-waving away the Kamala Harris campaign editing press headlines in ads to spread disinformation.
Incredible.
5:32 PM · Aug 13, 2024
Removed (Banned) Dec 31, 2023
Comment removed
Colin Hunt Dec 31, 2023
"Degrowth has many great ideas that would correct social injustice."
Please explain who is expected to die off for everyone else. Also please explain how you expect this to be enforced. //
Removed (Banned) 22 hrs ago
Comment removed
Colin Hunt 15 hrs ago
Typical ad hominem from people like you trying to avoid the fact that your recommendations will result in more poverty and death in developing nations. And you still refuse to answer the questions put to you.
The trick to developing immunity to misinformation
“The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.” ― Isaac Asimov, 1988 //
You’re probably thinking “it’s just a meme”, but it is illustrative of a wider problem where information is presented in this manner: as if the truth is subjective. I only need to open any social media app to see that ‘subjective truth’ seems to be everywhere, and every day there is new questionable information to think about (this assertion isn’t only anecdotal, but is also supported by research). //
As social psychologist Dr. Sander van der Linden points out in his book Foolproof: Why We Fall for Misinformation and How to Build Immunity, misinformation is not new. Previous large-scale examples of misinformation taking hold in populations include Nazi propaganda, which heavily relied on the printed press, radio and cinema, and misinformation campaigns that have been traced back to Roman times when emperors used messages on coins as a form of mass communication to gain power. //
Many vested interests and those who believe misinformation themselves use these biases to their advantage. If this was a war, I would argue that the other side is winning. Thanks to some of these people being convincing communicators, and using storytelling that plays on these biases to their advantage, they have been able to influence what wider populations believe on multitudinous topics ranging from gene-editing to nuclear energy to degrowth as a solution to climate change (it’s not). //
The greatest irony is that anti-nuclear activists have also been able to convincingly embed their unscientific position within environmentalism, even though nuclear energy is the cleanest and most environmentally friendly energy source available to humankind, with the smallest land footprint of all energy sources.
Slogans and stories are sticky, but they may not be true or helpful. Hence I’ve argued before that catchphrases and slogans used by activists are often convincing and successful, even when they are inaccurate. Stories, however, are essential to communicating scientific matters, and we need more people to tell them.
After all, it’s much easier and faster to respond with “what about the waste?” when I mention nuclear energy, than for me to explain why spent fuel isn’t the problem many people think it is, which takes time and isn’t as catchy or simple as the aphorism “what about the waste?” (I have covered the waste argument in detail in this article.) In my work tackling misinformation, I have honed some of these detailed responses to convey them through catchphrases that have also been popularised, such as “it’s only waste if you waste it” (in reference to being able to recycle spent fuel) and “meanwhile fossil fuel waste is being stored in the Earth’s atmosphere”, which is both true and a sticky idea. //
Although no one has studied it directly, I feel sure that coining and popularising terms like “nuclear saves lives”, “energy is life”, “nuclear energy is clean energy”, and “rethink nuclear” has helped to combat the misinformation we’ve heard about nuclear energy for so long. //
People often ask how I stay calm when countering constant ad hominem attacks, gish-galloping and sometimes outright insults. As Mr Spock once said, “Reverting to name-calling suggests that you are defensive and, therefore, find my opinion valid.” My answer is that I don’t take people’s biases personally - after all, I used to believe misinformation myself. We have all done so at some point in our lives, and we are all susceptible to believing misinformation in the future. While it’s worth learning to identify the few people who hold fundamental beliefs on a topic that simply cannot be changed, to save wasting your time debating them, remember that for most people these messages do have an impact. It took me years to change my mind from being against nuclear energy to being in favour of it, and every person who took the time to dispel the misinformation I believed, and provide better sources for me to read to counter my viewpoints, had an impact on my beliefs.
While it may not seem challenging to you, remember that when you engage with someone on a wedge issue, you are making a worldview-threatening correction. It is no different than learning that the Earth is spherical when you’ve grown up believing that it is flat. ///
Evangelism takes time and repetition.
Unfortunately, when we wrote on Omar backtracking... sorta, Google demonetized our article, claiming that it contained "dangerous or derogatory content." They didn't bother to tell us which line or lines in the piece were problematic; they never do. //
The bottom line is, we reported on a Congresswoman spreading misinformation/propaganda and halfheartedly retracting it, and Google thought that was "dangerous or derogatory content" that ads should not be run on.
When the truth keeps getting out despite our tech overlords' best efforts, their last tool is to starve us and destroy our business by denying us advertising revenue.