A great examination on the tricks the media uses to mislead people

[Chrysia]

[video=youtube;ofDXJsKsA30]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofDXJsKsA30[/vdeo]

This video is better IMHO.

I made a whole thread based on this one.

People are already complaining that Sargon's video is 18 minutes, they're not going to watch David Rubin's 30 minute one.

[Dezerte]

Not having watched this specific video, the video author in question is a bit too sensationalist and conspiratorial for my tastes. While I have watched some videos from him in the past, and even agreed on some points he made, this sort of content does not interest me.

I guess I can't really identify with it as I live in Sweden where news media is a lot better, apparently. I've heard often that US media is bad, and there's probably a sliver of truth in that video but as I don't really watch "MSM" from the US I can't say either way.

[Chrysia]

If schools were like people are trying to paint them to be. We once again enter the land of an entity that's both, smart enough to manipulate the whole country, but too stupid to apply it correctly. If our current conservative base is the result of business or economics faculty holding the fort against the liberal oppression, it makes liberals fit my assertion exactly. After all, why not use your influence everywhere, but where it counts? Why not use your malevolence to cause a wave of demand side businessman? Why not dominate the economist sphere with everyone screaming for the strength of the proletariat? It makes no sense...

Because it's not a conspiracy. It's a trend borne out by the normal political leanings of the people interested in these subjects, especially those capable and interested in teaching them.

[Willias]

That's not what I said. I said that the faculty of these respective schools tend to lean one way or the other ideologically. There is a trend in business schools for conservatism, and a trend in communications and journalism schools towards liberalism. In the case of many journalism schools, it's anecdotally particularly bad.

I never claimed that you'll inherently come out of those schools with the political ideology of the instructors, but the way the instructor presents material can and often is influenced by their political bias. The bias of the instructor can and sometimes does lead to critical information being deemphasized or left out entirely. This happens with people on both sides of the political spectrum, and at all levels of education.

That restriction on information can lead to students becoming disillusioned with the program and dropping out, especially when the instructor's bias clearly runs counter to their own.

The problem is that you're arguing based off of a sample size of 1.

[Dezerte]

If we're linking videos I think this one from Veritasium was good.

[Deleted]

TYT with 3 million + subscribers disagree with you

Kylie Minogue sold millions of records. Doesn't mean she can sing.

[Theodarzna]

People are already complaining that Sargon's video is 18 minutes, they're not going to watch David Rubin's 30 minute one.

People are dumb.

[Willias]

If schools were like people are trying to paint them to be. We once again enter the land of an entity that's both, smart enough to manipulate the whole country, but too stupid to apply it correctly. If our current conservative base is the result of business or economics faculty holding the fort against the liberal oppression, it makes liberals fit my assertion exactly. After all, why not use your influence everywhere, but where it counts? Why not use your malevolence to cause a wave of demand side businessman? Why not dominate the economist sphere with everyone screaming for the strength of the proletariat? It makes no sense...

The problem with the assumption that the business side of a campus being inherently conservative is that conservatism and liberalism have nothing to do with how much power or financial capability that an individual has.

[Felya]

That's not what I said. I said that the faculty of these respective schools tend to lean one way or the other ideologically. There is a trend in business schools for conservatism, and a trend in communications and journalism schools towards liberalism. In the case of many journalism schools, it's anecdotally particularly bad.

You are generalizing and ignoring there are facets to just about every subject that are liberal and conservative. There is nothing about business or economics or journalism, that would lead you to believe majority exclusive ideology. You can keep repeating it, but it won't explain why this would be.

I never claimed that you'll inherently come out of those schools with the political ideology of the instructors, but the way the instructor presents material can and often is influenced by their political bias. The bias of the instructor can and sometimes does lead to critical information being deemphasized or left out entirely. This happens with people on both sides of the political spectrum, and at all levels of education.

You are claiming both, that they do not inherently teach the way they lean and that they fundamentally teach in the way they lean. You can keep repeating 'bias of the instructor', but you have yet to actually explain why bias has to play a role... while claiming it's not inherent...

That restriction on information can lead to students becoming disillusioned with the program and dropping out, especially when the instructor's bias clearly runs counter to their own.

This doesn't actually say anything. If your bias tells you there are only 49 real states, the teacher telling you that you are wrong, will also confront your bias and make you want to leave. The onus there is not the teacher, but the student who walks out of the class because their bias is confronted. The teacher could be saying anything, to have that result.

[MasterHamster]

What some people seem unable to grasp, is that regarding everything presented as false until supported by one's own "preferable" source, isn't much better than blindly accepting everything.

But alas, we already see people's instant reaction turn into 'nope, fake news' if it's CNN (which is shit in many regards, no doubt), ABC, CBS etc
And that taints their initial view of the matter, because they will remain sceptical even if it's later "supported" by alternate media (which maybe then has additional details, and thus the initial skepticism gets reaffirmed anyway)


It's healthy to be skeptical and not accepting everything at face value, but denying everything is probably even more damaging, as these alternate medias have clear agendas themselves. You get people sucked in by the "What they don't show/tell you" and you can feed them pretty much anything. Just scrolling through Breitbarts front page and you can pick up pretty much everything about their stance on key issues, political bias, anti-immigration narrative, etc.

So if CNN, which again is poor and has made many deliberate choices to paint a certain picture, is automatic fake news because of their "bias", why should people expect anything different from sources like Breitbart? Just because they don't hide their bias?




Everyone is doing this, to some degree. The only way to get as close to an unbiased view of an event is to compare articles from different parts of the spectrum and piece together the more coherent picture. But this high-horse shit attitude believing that one is somehow above the masses by blanket-accusing large media companies of "hiding truths" is not constructive, and helps absolutely nothing. Blanket-statements like "Lol buzzfeed" or "kek Clinton News Network"

Then check the referenced sources, check the writer(s) of the article. Don't look at what page the story happens to be uploaded on and make up your whole mind based on that.

[Felya]

The problem with the assumption that the business side of a campus being inherently conservative is that conservatism and liberalism have nothing to do with how much power or financial capability that an individual has.

They do in the since of supply side economics vs demand side economics and the whole proletariat vs corporate interest.

If you want to see it in action, tell @Vyxn that Keynesian was right...

- - - Updated - - -

Because it's not a conspiracy. It's a trend borne out by the normal political leanings of the people interested in these subjects, especially those capable and interested in teaching them.

No, that would be a conspiracy. Because your claim isn't that there is some even split between conservative or liberal journalists, but that there is a major gap. If both are equally sound, the only way something like you are proposing is real, is through conspiracy.

[Chrysia]

You are generalizing and ignoring there are facets to just about every subject that are liberal and conservative. There is nothing about business or economics or journalism, that would lead you to believe majority exclusive ideology. You can keep repeating it, but it won't explain why this would be.



You are claiming both, that they do not inherently teach the way they lean and that they fundamentally teach in the way they lean. You can keep repeating 'bias of the instructor', but you have yet to actually explain why bias has to play a role... while claiming it's not inherent...



This doesn't actually say anything. If your bias tells you there are only 49 real states, the teacher telling you that you are wrong, will also confront your bias and make you want to leave. The onus there is not the teacher, but the student who walks out of the class because their bias is confronted. The teacher could be saying anything, to have that result.

When did I say that there aren't? I'm saying that the instructors are biased, not the subject, and that certain subjects attract people of certain ideologies more than others. Hell, there's even proof of it, print and news media for instance has an insane liberal bias.

No, I'm not, at all. I'm saying that their bias will necessarily creep into how they teach, but the degree and quality of information that this affects will vary.

There's a difference between an incorrect notion concerning a fact and a bias on a topic that is routinely colored by political ideology, such as economics and journalism. While economics is not inherently either liberal or conservative, there are both conservative and liberal schools of economic thought that ignore the liberal or conservative components of economics, respectively. This is demonstrably true. It's one of the leading fissures between politicians, which model of economics we should use in a given situation, even though no model we've yet developed is perfect for every situation.

If a teacher's political bias creeps into the classroom, and I have personally experienced this to varying degrees, especially in my literary courses, this can alter the data the students are exposed to, to their detriment.

[Maconi]

In general, I'd say that entire group of Youtubers suffers from a problem where they're mostly windbags who take six years to make a really vapid and/or poorly supported point that could have been made better in about 20% of the time by someone with even half a clue. Nobody wants to watch some lengthy video just for the main thrust of the argument to be as mighty as a limp noodle.

The longer the video, the more money they make (with the way the current YouTube algorithms work). It's actually against their best interest to make short, concise videos.

[Chrysia]

No, that would be a conspiracy. Because your claim isn't that there is some even split between conservative or liberal journalists, but that there is a major gap. If both are equally sound, the only way something like you are proposing is real, is through conspiracy.

Oooooor conservatives are just not that interested in journalism because of something typical of the conservative mindset.

[Raskayz]

Oooooor conservatives are just not that interested in journalism because of something typical of the conservative mindset.

Denying reality ?

[sethman75]

Oooooor conservatives are just not that interested in journalism because of something typical of the conservative mindset.

Conservs are not interested in agenda driven biased journalism. Big difference

[Chrysia]

Denying reality ?

No. Reality denial is not necessary for a conservative mindset. Insular communities have a tendency to breed more conservatism, so you can say isolation from differing viewpoints or life experiences has a tendency to drive people towards conservatism, but that has nothing to do with why conservatives do or don't enter the journalistic field.

I'd postulate that it's a combination of factors, including, but not limited to, the conservative view of what constitutes work/labor, and the generally shitty pay of the practice. You need to love journalism to want to go into it, because it pays crap, and loving journalism requires a broader mindset than conservativism generally breeds. Conservatism is inherently an insular mindset.

Conservs are not interested in agenda driven biased journalism. Big difference

Hahahahahaha. That's factually untrue.

[Theodarzna]

Conservs are not interested in agenda driven biased journalism. Big difference

It would be fair to say an open conservative would struggle in journalism school. That is a difficult road to walk with professors who ARE going to dislike you. Then after school you have to spend YEARS as an intern making dick nothing and unless you have parents or some source of income its just not going to do it for you.

Conservatives will either be the ones with wealthy parents whose parents want them to inherit the business and thus they go for Business School, or they are working class or lower class and probably could not afford Journalism school or the life of a journalist post graduation.

[Vyxn]

So if CNN, which again is poor and has made many deliberate choices to paint a certain picture, is automatic fake news because of their "bias", why should people expect anything different from sources like Breitbart? Just because they don't hide their bias?

.

because you know what your getting with Breitbart they bill them selves as a right leaning conservative news outlet
CNN doesn't they claim they are unbiased and impartial which they aren't they are as much liberal as Breitbart is conservative

- - - Updated - - -

Liberal. Liberal liberal libweal, liberal liberal liberal liberal? Liberal! Libersl liberal liberal liberal liberal liberal.


This is how every one of your posts read. I even threw in a couple misspellings for accuracy.

kind of like racism, racism, racism, racism here, racism there, racism everywhere like we get from the majority of your post

[Raskayz]

because you know what your getting with Breitbart they bill them selves as a right leaning conservative news outlet
CNN doesn't they claim they are unbiased and impartial which they aren't they are as much liberal as Breitbart is conservative

so you'd rather drink a bottle of bleach because it says bleach on it than drinking an unlabeled bottle of bleach ?
that is your reasoning

kind of like racism, racism, racism, racism here, racism there, racism everywhere like we get from the majority of your post

I see way more liberal bashig than racism allegations on mmo champ