America’s Misinformation Crisis

[StrangePackage]

A misinformation campaign, by definition, requires knowing spreading of false information. "Misinformation" implies intent to deceive, and a "campaign" has to be intentional. So your own admission here retracts your earlier characterization, which is fine. Just be aware of it.

The people spreading conspiracy theories are doing so knowingly. They are spreading doctored or invented photos, reciting false anecdotes, and making up claims out of pure cloth. They have been corrected repeatedly and still do. The difference -- well, one difference -- is that people didn't fully know what happened in the Michael Brown situation. You couldn't "correct" the Brown family claims because there was no objective information to the contrary. knew what happened in the Michael Brown situation (we still don't).

You're letting Bo make this about the tree, rather than the forest.

 

[korgguy1971]

If you ever wanted a perfect example of bad-faith bosiding, here it is.

Gives new meaning to ItsBoTime.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

A misinformation campaign, by definition, requires knowing spreading of false information. "Misinformation" implies intent to deceive, and a "campaign" has to be intentional. So your own admission here retracts your earlier characterization, which is fine. Just be aware of it.

The people spreading conspiracy theories are doing so knowingly. They are spreading doctored or invented photos, reciting false anecdotes, and making up claims out of pure cloth. They have been corrected repeatedly and still do. The difference -- well, one difference -- is that people didn't fully know what happened in the Michael Brown situation. You couldn't "correct" the Brown family claims because there was no objective information to the contrary. knew what happened in the Michael Brown situation (we still don't).

We have a fairly decent idea about what happened, and it was not what we were initially led to believe. There were many other instances of information in the years that followed, some of which also caused violence. Here’s another example that I mentioned earlier:

2020 Minneapolis false rumors riot - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

There were also riots in Charlotte due to misinformation about a shooting there.

Killing of Keith Lamont Scott - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[superrific]

Not interested in any more bullshit. You want to talk about this, start a thread.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Not interested in any more bullshit. You want to talk about this, start a thread.

So you are only interested in combatting misinformation that aligns with your own point of view? That’s…exactly why we are in the situation that we are in currently. A perfect example proving my point.

I’ve been pointing out misinformation for over 10 years. It is telling that some people get very angry when they fall victim to it.

 

[CarolinaFever]

And this is why the Pubs have been trying to get rid of good public education, to make people dumber and easier to control, and to use tax money for religious schools, to make people dumber and easier to control.

 

[superrific]

So you are only interested in combatting misinformation that aligns with your own point of view? That’s…exactly why we are in the situation that we are in currently. A perfect example proving my point.

I already explained to you what misinformation means. You already admitted this didn't qualify. We're done.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

I already explained to you what misinformation means. You already admitted this didn't qualify. We're done.

And I gave you numerous examples of misinformation that met your definition. Your response was to throw your milk, grab your blanket and run away. Why?

 

[superrific]

And I gave you numerous examples of misinformation that met your definition. Your response was to throw your milk, grab your blanket and run away. Why?

Because we are living in a hurricane of shit, and you're complaining about a toilet that was clogged up a decade ago. I don't care for the same reason that I don't care what basketball team wins the DIII national championship. If you feel compelled to do your thing where you equate a couple of cherrypicked examples from a decade ago with a political party that has devoted itself to messaging that is close to 100% lies, almost 100% of the time, knock yourself out. You can put "both sides do it" on your fucking headstone for all I care. I'm not interested. Good bye.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Because we are living in a hurricane of shit, and you're complaining about a toilet that was clogged up a decade ago. I don't care for the same reason that I don't care what basketball team wins the DIII national championship. If you feel compelled to do your thing where you equate a couple of cherrypicked examples from a decade ago with a political party that has devoted itself to messaging that is close to 100% lies, almost 100% of the time, knock yourself out. You can put "both sides do it" on your fucking headstone for all I care. I'm not interested. Good bye.

You’re putting words in my mouth and seeing only what you want to see. I listed numerous instances of misinformation going back to the 1890s. This wasn’t mean to be a “both sides” argument, simply a “misinformation has caused problems in the past and is showing no signs of slowing down” post. I fail to understand how any of this is controversial.

 

[finesse]

You’re putting words in my mouth and seeing only what you want to see. I listed numerous instances of misinformation going back to the 1890s. This wasn’t mean to be a “both sides” argument, simply a “misinformation has caused problems in the past and is showing no signs of slowing down” post. I fail to understand how any of this is controversial.

Because you refuse to accept the difference between things that were sometimes both sides and the approach that has become the primary weapon of the Republican Party from the bottom to the scum that rose to the top. That is not both sides and that is not disputable.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

Because you refuse to accept the difference between things that were sometimes both sides and the approach that has become the primary weapon of the Republican Party from the bottom to the scum that rose to the top. That is not both sides and that is not disputable.

When have I tried to equate both sides? Once again, people are putting words into my mouth. Today’s GOP is essentially the Kremlin and uses disinformation at every opportunity and has no scruples doing so.

 

[4thgenheel]

You don't think people protested and even rioted after the Michael Brown shooting? Were you under a rock in 2014? Dude's parents even testified in front of the UN. Massive misinformation campaign that much of the country fell for.

an unarmed black teenager was shot 6 times (fired on a total of 12 times) by a police officer during an altercation that was described differently by numerous witnesses. the DOJ eventually determined that they didn't have grounds to charge the officer even though he used poor judgment in his handling of the initial altercation and his decision to chase after a fleeing teenager who he'd already shot once.

the michael brown shooting was a legitimate quagmire and the protests that followed weren't the result of misinformation.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

an unarmed black teenager was shot 6 times (fired on a total of 12 times) by a police officer during an altercation that was described differently by numerous witnesses. the DOJ eventually determined that they didn't have grounds to charge the officer even though he used poor judgment in his handling of the initial altercation and his decision to chase after a fleeing teenager who he'd already shot once.

the michael brown shooting was a legitimate quagmire and the protests that followed weren't the result of misinformation.

The teenager was shot after he robbed a store and then charged and physically attacked the officer at least twice. There were protests (and riots) afterwards because malicious actors claimed that Brown was shot multiple times in the back execution style with his hands up, something that the local investigation and the DOJ investigation were both conclusively able to debunk.

 

[nycfan]

 

[4thgenheel]

The teenager was shot after he robbed a store and then charged and physically attacked the officer at least twice. There were protests (and riots) afterwards because malicious actors claimed that Brown was shot multiple times in the back execution style with his hands up, something that the local investigation and the DOJ investigation were both conclusively able to debunk.

i knew this nasty attempt at justifying the unjustifiable was coming from you, boot licker extraordinaire that you are.

stealing a box of swishers obviously doesn't even remotely justify police shooting you dead in the street like a dog. half of the kids i grew up with shoplifted way more than that and got into scuffles with cops and somehow never got shot. wanna guess what they looked like?

and "charged and physically attacked the officer at least twice" isn't something we know for certain. there is no video of the incident and there are a very wide variety of differing witness accounts.

an unarmed 18 year old shoplifting should never, ever end with him dead in the street 12 bullets later, i don't care if he was being aggressive. deadly force is completely unjustified in that situation, period. let him run, call in back up, find him and subdue him. he'd been shot once. they knew who he was, his buddy had stopped running.

policing in this country needs to be completely reformed and your defense of that situation is nauseating.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

i knew this nasty attempt at justifying the unjustifiable was coming from you, boot licker extraordinaire that you are.

stealing a box of swishers obviously doesn't even remotely justify police shooting you dead in the street like a dog. half of the kids i grew up with shoplifted way more than that and got into scuffles with cops and somehow never got shot. wanna guess what they looked like?

and "charged and physically attacked the officer at least twice" isn't something we know for certain. there is no video of the incident and there are a very wide variety of differing witness accounts.

an unarmed 18 year old shoplifting should never, ever end with him dead in the street 12 bullets later, i don't care if he was being aggressive. deadly force is completely unjustified in that situation, period. let him run, call in back up, find him and subdue him. he'd been shot once. they knew who he was, his buddy had stopped running.

policing in this country needs to be completely reformed and your defense of that situation is nauseating.

We do know exactly what happened there. Multiple eyewitnesses were interviewed by the local authorities and the DOJ. The DOJ found compelling eyewitness and forensic evidence confirming Officer Wilson's account and found that the "hand's up, don't shoot" story came from people that either recanted the story later or admitted to not even being present when the shooting occurred. One Black man who witnessed the shooting told investigators, under oath, that he wished he had been armed because he would have shot Brown himself.

Brown wasn't shot for shoplifting. Brown was shot for attacking the officer who stopped him for shoplifting and attempting to grab his gun. Brown's DNA was found on Officer Wilson's gun holster and gun. Brown was shot once, in the hand, and turned to run. Wilson exited his car and began to chase after Brown. Brown then stopped running, turned around, and charged directly towards Wilson, prompting Wilson to fire again until Brown went down. Once again, all of these facts were confirmed by the local authorities and Department of Justice (federal). Eyewitnesses who saw what went down testified that they had been threatened with physical violence if they came forward with their story.

 

[4thgenheel]

We do know exactly what happened there. Multiple eyewitnesses were interviewed by the local authorities and the DOJ. The DOJ found compelling eyewitness and forensic evidence confirming Officer Wilson's account and found that the "hand's up, don't shoot" story came from people that either recanted the story later or admitted to not even being present when the shooting occurred. One Black man who witnessed the shooting told investigators, under oath, that he wished he had been armed because he would have shot Brown himself.

Brown wasn't shot for shoplifting. Brown was shot for attacking the officer who stopped him for shoplifting and attempting to grab his gun. Brown's DNA was found on Officer Wilson's gun holster and gun. Brown was shot once, in the hand, and turned to run. Wilson exited his car and began to chase after Brown. Brown then stopped running, turned around, and charged directly towards Wilson, prompting Wilson to fire again until Brown went down. Once again, all of these facts were confirmed by the local authorities and Department of Justice (federal). Eyewitnesses who saw what went down testified that they had been threatened with physical violence if they came forward with their story.

we don't. witness statements uncorroborated by video aren't unimpeachable. other witnesses told other stories.

what occurred was an escalation of a shoplifting incident that had already happened.

it should have NEVER gotten to that point and it is on law enforcement to deescalate and not use deadly force to solve such a minor infraction.

the DOJ and local authorities acknowledged that wilson's handling of the initial altercation and his choice to chase brown after that were in poor judgment.

 

[2ManyBlueCups]

we don't. witness statements uncorroborated by video aren't unimpeachable. other witnesses told other stories.

what occurred was an escalation of a shoplifting incident that had already happened.

it should have NEVER gotten to that point and it is on law enforcement to deescalate and not use deadly force to solve such a minor infraction.

the DOJ and local authorities acknowledged that wilson's handling of the initial altercation and his choice to chase brown after that were in poor judgment.

We do. I encourage you to read the DOJ report on the shooting. The escalation of the strong-arm robbery occurred because Brown took it upon himself to attack Wilson. Wilson is not to blame for being attacked while attempting to stop a robbery subject. Once Brown attacked Wilson, grabbed his gun, and was shot once in the hand, it would have been improper of Wilson not to attempt to continue the arrest. The initial infraction does not matter when it comes to lethal force; lethal force isn't a punishment. It is a defense of oneself or others. You can be a mass murderer and be arrested without incident if you surrender peacefully. On the other hand, you can not be suspected of a single crime at all and be shot and killed if you decide to randomly pull out a gun and start shooting at the police.

 

[finesse]

Could we go back to discussing the current problem?