Chach

50 minutes ago, holystove said:

Doesn't he make the point that even though the American audience polarized first, news media such as Fox News, but also the NYT on the left, tried to keep up by feeding into that and creating a 'feedback loop' for polarisation?  So if he doesn't think Fox News started the didvide, they are certainly reinforcing it?

Why is America more polarized than say Scandinavia, or the Netherlands, Belgium etc?  If every society is, or could be, equally polarized, an important factor in keeping that under control is not having 'extreme' news organisations reinforcing the divide, by for example not having a strong (neutral) public broadcaster (as most EU countries do) but having Fox News as your main source of information.

Interesting podcast.  WIll listen to more episodes.

The point he makes I think is they keep levelling up on the partisanship to compete for the portion of the viewership that are actually tuning in now they don;t have to, I said in my original post that most people on both sides don't even care if it's true now it's all about feeding their biases.

I also think it's much less influential than we give it credit for, we like politics and so does the media so we internally amplify it. Most people just aren't that engaged/have much information.

Like I said originally, I think it's overreach in the liberalising of economies and borders, but there must be many other polarising factors when you did down.

War, particularly long ones would be very polarising, religious beliefs that interpret abortion as murder would be very polarising, countries with huge disparities in social norms between regional areas and cities and the every growing issue of wealth inequality.

You show me a country that's small, affluent and relatively homogeneous like Sweden and differences are going to be much less pronounced.

AfD is a good example,  in a very short period of time they have polarised internally to become very extreme as a result of the EU and immigration.

11 hours ago, Sibdane said:

I think one of the biggest problems with Fox News' influence is that it doesn't have any true competitors on it's side of the line (right-wing based); it's the main source of information for Conservatives here, so it's a lot easier to push an agenda/narrative.

If you watched Fox News do you think you would be swayed by their agenda?

If not, why do you think that is?

16 hours ago, holystove said:

 

<== about the TV show

<== what I think Fox News has done; no longer about the TV show.  And what (I assume) Matt tried to make clear in his response.

<== what a Fox-like channel could do in any western democracy

Your whole thing is to claim a causal link between news and in particular Fox News and political polarisation/divide and I am saying it does not stand up to any analysis, this is an opinion I come to reluctantly as my opinion used to be the same as yours, before it was changed by evidence presented through research by mostly left wing/liberal types.

Your claim that the show is anyway hugely representative of the truth is very flimsy on its own, I watched it I was entertained but it was never intended to be objective.

Case in point, the first 15 years of Sean Hannity's involvement was Hannity and Colmes, Colmes bringing the liberal viewpoint. Not mentioned/shown or in anyway consistent with the story narrative (I'm sure the book is a lot more honest that the show granted, and I think I will read it)

I've posted this before have a listen, Ezra Klein is as inner city tree hugging left winger type as you can get. Founder of Vox which is also about as left wing as you can get. 

At 1:08 (if you don't want to listen to the whole thing) they talk about how the media got to where it's at now in response to Sean Carroll's idea that the Media is maybe the causal reason. You can literally hear him let go of the idea in real time as the facts are presented.

https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2020/01/27/81-ezra-klein-on-polarization-politics-and-identity/

16 hours ago, Matt said:

I was agreeing with the Fox stuff, which is entirely accurate. It is much more than a TV show. 

Please explain how it is "entirely accurate, it is much more than a TV show".

Dunno what's going on with the testing in the UK but there is zero chance your infection rate it correct, and needless to say if you don't know who has got it you've no chance of stopping it spreading.

How is the irony of 5 people liking a post that in response to a post saying people seek out information to confirm their own political biases, states that a TV show made by liberals, based on a book by a liberal, for liberals about a prominent conservative with the express intention of enraging them is an accurate explanation of how politics got the way they are.

I mean, oh my fucking days. Where is the attempt at honesty and self awareness? IT'S A FUCKING TV SHOW.

2 hours ago, holystove said:

The show makes clear that the intention of Fox News was never to bring you the news.  It was to push a narrative, made to look like news.  Ailes didn't care whether or not something was true, it got aired as long as it hurt the democrats (liberals) or anyone he deemed un-American. 

Fox News was, and is, not exploiting a divide that is already there in the American public, I think Fox is (partly) responsible for creating it.   Fox News triggers people who are scared and worried, and gives them an easy explanation and enemy.  Trump couldn't have happened without 25 years of Fox News preceding him.

Compare it to Germany.  Right now the AfD is a small party which tops out at 10-15%.  Now imagine they had their own propaganda channel, called it news, and made it the only source of information for a great number of Germans...

Not saying I agree with anything Fox news has done but what you've spun their is the narrative that liberals (including me) having been spinning for years because it makes us feel better. 

I just don't think it stands up to any real analysis, you look at the numbers watching something like Hannity relative to the voting public and its a drop in the ocean, then add up all the other pro left news channels and there's more people watching that than Fox News.

This quote from the show attributed (incorrectly) to Ailes sums it up "people don't want to be informed, they want to feel informed" people want to feed their biases including us.

Let's be honest, Fox News and Trump are a symptom of the same thing, 40 years of neo-liberal overreach.

On the flipside, how is this approach working out for us?

On 30/12/2019 at 23:27, TallPaul1878 said:

I'm completely converted to audio books. 

What I would suggest though is to research the narrators. I got a book that was narrated very well but with a very heavy American accent that I could not quite place. It irritated me throughout. It's unfortunate but some accents just grate on different people and it's difficult to tolerate for 8 hours of listening. 

Agree with both points here, think I will keep reading fiction in print but have completely swapped to Audible for non fiction it's just so much more convenient, in the car or exercising you get through so much more and I concentrate much better when I'm moving.

With regards the accents my pet hate has become the authors reading them themselves rather than a professional narrator, I find it something akin to that feeling of not wanting to read the book of something after you've already seen the movie because you tend to imagine the movie rather than imagine your own version.

Have just finished The Madness of Crowds : Gender, Race and Identity by Douglas Murray which he narrates and I found mildly irritating at first as his politics already grate on me, but also made me laugh out loud a few times.

Just started Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) By new testament scholar Bart Ehrman, very interesting for anyone with a past or present interest in the origins of Christianity.

11 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

They've had to stop trials because it's literally killing people. The best hope right now appears to be something being tested by Gilead.

From what I've read that trial was stopped because it was causing heart murmurs due to the high doses, but it's still being prescribed in mild cases but no clear evidence that it's effective.

17 hours ago, holystove said:

Another show that illustrates what is currently wrong with the US is 'The Loudest Voice' about Roger Ailes, and Fox News.  Just finished watching it yesterday.  Highly recommended.

Can you expand on what you mean by this this. I see Fox News and CNN as something akin to WWE as in the people watching it don't really care if it's factual. It's a product made with the intention of confirming the innate biases of the consumer. I notice this in myself all the time albeit much less than I used to now I am aware of it.

First you have a feeling about what you want to believe based on your personal preference and then you seek out the information that confirms it, are you saying that you think politically biased media are driving the narrative or just ramping up the polarisation? 

17 hours ago, Matt said:

He makes huge donations (directly and through his and his wife’s foundation) all over. Pretty sure I read that he's the 2nd largest contributor to WHO, including countries, after the US. I honestly don’t believe he has an agenda, I think he funds who he thinks is doing the right thing

edit: quoted the wrong post, apologies. It was the BBC sharing the WHO donation:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52291654

 

It's been very confusing watch people go after Bill Gates based on tin foil hattery,, seems to be mostly Trump supporters who want to discredit him because he's a liberal who has been been sounding the alarm on lack of preparedness for a pandemic for quite a while, Candace Owens went on a disgraceful rant against him on twitter last night.

Guy has literally pledged to give away all his money,  and is spending on it on the most disadvantaged and people are calling him scum online. 

12 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

your selling him short there.  he has been a career politician and is one of the longest (if not the longest) serving members that is active.  that is a massive advantage because he knows how stuff works and how to navigate the political environment.  Trump has no clue, which is evident when he says he has the power to reopen states for COVID (he does not).  

 

other than those 2 points, yeah not much there charisma wise, old white guy, etc.  but i too will vote for him.  Maybe he makes an exciting pick for VP that gets us all energized.

Caitlyn Flanagan from The Atlantic made the same point, he knows how to whip the vote and get things done but no leadership qualities.

I am going to make the prediction that Biden will win handily, Trump is going to turn out the Democratic base for them and with the economy in the toilet due to restrictions from CV19 people will vote for stability.

It is going to be ugly though, I may have to log off Twitter for the duration.

*from 15:00 if you want to skip straight to the homemade Youtube propaganda video.

This is amazing, and when I say amazing I mean completely deranged. The video he has cobbled together to demonstrate what an good job he is doing is breathtaking for what it represents. Propaganda from a would be authoritarian raging against being held to account by a free press.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNaCSwezJHo

19 hours ago, pete0 said:

You've still not responsed. Why are you finding it so hard to answer a simple question? 

Voting tory or not you still share their disgusting ideals. Again you're deflecting. You as a person absolutely disgust me. How have misrepresentated? Quote were I have and give an explanation and whilst you're at it quote we've you've already picked holes in my arguments, that or apologise for being the nasty little manipulative liar you are. 

How is it unbalanced? I've explained everything yet you can't even give straight forward answers. 

For the fifth(?) time:

How many deaths do you believe underfunding the NHS has caused? 

What evidence you presenting? 

What did the tories do well? 

What good did they do

What was it they prioritised and delivered instead? 

 

You should consider logging off for a bit Pete, you're getting a but deranged.

14 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

Tons of people have moved or weren’t registered to vote, they are allowed to show up and do a provisional ballot.  That won’t be the case now.  It’s discriminating against those not on the rolls or those just turning of age without internet, etc.

 

for my state you mail in a form you have to print out, once you do they send you a ballot.  Not a big deal for president since it’s confirmed trump and Biden now, but we have local issues we are voting for that are gonna get an uneven response.  Higher taxes for increased money to go to schools and the disabled.  Both usually pass but with the way it is now, we’ll see.  I hope they do.

I see from his Twitter post Trump is against having a mail in ballot, wonder if that based on any modelling he's seen or just standard Trump conspiracy peddling,

15 minutes ago, pete0 said:

What an absolute tory politician response this is. Fucking embarrassing. 

One, you've just rambled without giving a response to a very simple question. How many more deaths? 

Two, you've then deflected saying you've already picked holes(three, superior complex) and that I need to be honest (again deflecting, but I'll call this number four, you're dishonest; will lie and try to drag down an opponent rather than rise above them with an argument).

All I've asked is for how many and some evidence. Not hard is it. Show me were you've already picked holes or admit you're a liar with a brain that has an over active fearful section that makes you less able to make a well informed unbiased decision. 

Now for the cherry on top. Number five, in true fascist fashion you've actually took the time to delete part of quote rather than address it. Says a lot about your ideals when you can't even answer a question asking what good your ideals bring. 

I'll add another. What did the tories do well? 

What good did they do?

What was it they prioritised and delivered instead? 

Have never voted for a conservative government in my 28 years of voting, being left wing doesn't mean you have to misrepresent the nature or ideas of your political opponents. which is primarily your modus operandi.

You've literally just accused me of being a fascist because I never addressed all of the parts of your post that you wanted me to. Do you think that's balanced Pete?

On 04/04/2020 at 23:57, markjazzbassist said:

My state Ohio canceled our primary and is doing only mail in ballots.  This greatly favors conservatives As poor folks aren’t paying postage and going online to Print off a ballot (need access to internet, need printer, need post stamps).  All those work against the poor and middle class especially in the depression we are about to be in.  If the general election is the same way I think he will win no problem. 

For an election by postal ballot would they not just send a ballot to everyone registered on the electoral roll with a reply paid envelope?

I don't think you could have people printing out their own ballots, way too easily rorted. Is that what's happening in your primary?

2 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Ok fair enough Chach I understand,  I’m trying to avoid to many posts on this at the moment, it’s gotten quite close to home for me at the moment, and I’m losing the plot with it all to be honest. 

Fair enough mate, hope everything's ok with you and yours.

On 08/04/2020 at 19:52, Palfy said:

Poor answer totally ignored everything I asked by given answers to questions I never asked, Germany’s manufacturing capability has nothing to do with why they had more ventilators in the off set than us and why they bought thousands more as soon as they saw what was happening else where, they also bought hundreds of thousands of testing kits at the same time, when this government were talking about shaking hands with people who had tested positive and were advocating herd immunisation, you may work as a civil servant and believe that gives you a better insight into how government works, but please don’t treat us like idiots we all know why the Germans are in a better position than us, it’s because they reacted far quicker to what was happening by weeks. 
So testing is no indication of who is doing better Germany testing I believe 60,000 plus thousand a week and this country struggling to 10,000 I think the WHO would beg to differ with you on that point they have been advocating test test test for over 2 months now. 

Mate, go back and read the post I was responding to, it was barely comprehensible. I was literally  half guessing what point you were trying to make.

On 07/04/2020 at 21:41, pete0 said:

How many deaths do you believe underfunding the NHS has caused? 

What evidence you presenting? 

I don't need to present any evidence, you are the one making claims that the government is responsible for everyones poor health choices. Then when the holes are pointed out in you argument you just move the goal posts and say I have to provide evidence.

Try and be honest or all your posts will be ignored.

On 08/04/2020 at 20:39, pete0 said:

You can educate yourself. Stephen Fry gives a great explanation regarding tory brains not being fully functional that someone put on here. 

That video is a very simplified take on moral foundations theory, being the origins of morality and how it affects our politics which I have been espousing the whole time, not an "explanation regarding tory brains not being fully functional"

17 hours ago, Matt said:

The Tory’s are greedy to the extent that they’re evil

Honestly, when it comes to the politics of human morality you are the equivalent of a climate change denier. How many times does the science of why some people are liberal and why some are conservative and why it's important for the group as whole have to be pointed out before you reflect on how stupid it is to think half the population are evil because they don;t share your political views?

You can't pick and choose the science you believe, truth is truth. Conservatives are not evil, they have different priorities.

17 hours ago, Palfy said:

So why are the Germans so far a head off
us in testing and Ventilators and PPE as a bigger clumsy organisation working in the same time frame as ourselves, could it quite possibly be because they’ve invested over the years in their health care and were quicker to counteract what was happening elsewhere, if none of them then please explain why?

And explain what you mean by circumstances, circumstances out of there control or circumstances they brought on themselves. 

Germany doesn't have the same healthcare system as the UK,  in terms of the things you mention above there I would have thought that was self evident. Germany are dominant when it comes to manufacturing.

Also I would make the point it's a bit early to be drawing conclusions about who is doing better, that's something that can only really be determined at the end.

1 minute ago, Hafnia said:

You seem more arsed about point scoring... which says alot I guess. I'm not conceding anything, and as for a that anecdotal nonsense, it's always anecdotal when trying to go up against the government isn't it. 

The justification for downgrading was a "low" mortality rate.... mortality rates will be much lower when lots of deaths have been classed as pneumonia due to the complete lack of clinical diagnosed due to no testing.  But I'm probably wasting my time trying to convince you of that. It's a complete and utter farce. A fraction of promised tests have been Conducted, namely for the staff themselves. 

That's my last response on this.

Case fatality rate*

All the deaths will be counted, take your tin foil hat off.

Yes they might have got off to a poor start, they're a big clumsy organisation and preparing for something that has no one knew existed a few months ago or what symptoms it would cause is likely quite a bit harder than people imagine.  The reality could very well be they're doing the absolute best they can under the circumstances.

7 minutes ago, Hafnia said:

You seem to think I'm basing this on political parties.... I couldn't give a shit about political persuasion and my opinion isn't formed based on who is in power. This is a failing of good people and those responsible need to be held accountable.  I'm sure when there is a public enquiry we will learn some real truths....

The toys aren't in the pram and not should they be -   I have factual first hand information which isn't sugarcoated bullshit. 

So would you like to confirm that you would happily go in to do a job that would potentially cost you, your family and other patients their lives because of inadequate PPE? 

You're still trying to deflect from the point you made about the government purposely downgrading the disease, that a very big claim for which you still haven't supplied any evidence. Is it so hard to just admit that maybe you misunderstood or were misguided by someone who had an agenda?

You're "first hand information" is anecdotal, its a large healthcare system some areas will be poorly run, others will not.

With regards to your last point, I have never been in a position where my employer was responsible for my PPE but I always took responsibility for my own and that of my employees.