solarbird

2024-07-15 16:24:00

are we really going to start falling for least-effort weakest-sauce disinfo now?

I’m asking centrists, liberals, and the left. Fash and fash-adjacent, I know that’s your speciality, this one isn’t for you – though if you are reading, carry on, because I do have an important warning flag of disinformation to hand out, and even you need to care.

So. What even is the point of the “teleprompter glass shards” bullshit? The bullshit idea that Trump’s injury came from glass shards, specifically from his teleprompters, I mean? That one.

There’s also a variant that it’s “glass shards” from somewhere else, and not specifically the teleprompter, but the teleprompter one is the dominant variant that I’ve seen.

Thing is: it doesn’t fucking matter! Without the bullets, there’s no glass shards! The bullets are the proximate cause either way – tho’ I gotta say, this sure as fuck doesn’t look like a “glass shard” to me.

Why does it important to some people that it’s a “glass shard”? Why is this a thing I had to get into fights with people all Sunday? It’s clearly super-attractive to some people, and that’s important. Why?

But more importantly, what do you think you’re doing?! Particularly the teleprompter people! Because conspiracy theory bullshit looks no better on us than it looks on them!

It makes you look, in fact, like a credulous fool.

So apparently I gotta ask: are we really going to start falling for the absolute stupidest, dumbest-ass trivially-disprovable bullshit-grade disinfo now? Really? Stuff you could absolutely positively check yourself in 30 seconds and get a rock-solid disproof? Is that what we’re going to do now?

Because holy shit if that’s what we’re going to do now, then we really are fucked, because I really, really feel like this is somebody testing their centrist/liberal- and left-wing disinfo network to see how well it does, and where they can take you and how easily. And the first answer is bullshitdown, and the second answer appears to be trivially.

So here is RULE NUMBER ONE on “spotting disinformation.” At least, rule number one as I see it.

TO WIT:

If there is a general consensus on a news item, but there is an outlier that is telling you something you find attractive and something you really want to be true, then you need to back the hell off, because while it might be true, it’s way more likely bait.

This doesn’t mean the consensus is always right. To repeat myself, I am not saying the consensus coverage on new news is always right. That is something I am not saying. NOT. I repeat again, NOT saying that.

(And yeah, I have to repeat myself that many times on something like this, because that’s what it seems to take. That, too, I find infuriating.)

In particular, it’s generally not true in science, where the consensus early reporting on new science worth making headlines is generally wrong. Particularly for anything involving characteristics of “suspect classes,” like Black people, Indigenous people, and any and every kind of queer person in the world.

(Consider the ‘gay gene’ reporting in the 1990s, with the study authors actually in the background at their presentation saying ‘DO NOT REPORT THIS AS A GAY GENE, that’s not what this is’ followed immediately by a cut to a CNN reporter saying to camera, “This discovery of a ‘gay gene’…”)

But the vast majority of the time, if the outlier report is something you really want to hear, you need to treat it as if it’s radioactive plague hornets until you are goddamn well sure it’s correct. Or at least viable. Something with some real and solid support under it – and not just something tailored to grab you and people like you.

Because that shiny, shiny candy bite is exactly how disinformation and propaganda specialists hook you in. By offering a sweet, sweet lie you really want to be true.

That is rule one. If it’s that an outlier and that kind of attractive, it’s probably bait.

So.

If you’re reading this, and you’d decided “glass shard” happened, and in particular if it was teleprompter glass, I present to you here, from the original shooting video, the two teleprompters, both visible and apparently fully intact – and certainly not in “shards” – several seconds AFTER Trump’s injury.

That’s how easily this one’s disproved. 30 seconds of looking at a video.

Also, if that’s not enough, here’s a picture of the bullet whizzing past Trump’s head.

And yet so many people on Facebook in particular – for whatever reason, I don’t know why – are defending “glass shard” to an inch of their life. Some even after seeing the teleprompter picture. Because somehow, that’s what they want to believe – so they’re damned well going to.

And it’s bullshit. And also, how we got MAGA.

…

Hopping christ on a pogostick, folks, go sleep it off. And do better tomorrow, now that you have rule one. I know, a lot of you aren’t used to having to do this, aren’t used to hostile and disinformation-friendly press, aren’t used to having to pick out reality from the lies in this kind of way, and I’m sorry, but … you have to get better at it now. Like, right now.

I beg you. Learn to do better.

And don’t take bait.

112 days remain.

[link] #politics #USPol #politics #uspolitics

solarbird

2024-07-15 16:24:00

are we really going to start falling for least-effort weakest-sauce disinfo now?

I’m asking centrists, liberals, and the left. Fash and fash-adjacent, I know that’s your speciality, this one isn’t for you – though if you are reading, carry on, because I do have an important warning flag of disinformation to hand out, and even you need to care.

So. What even is the point of the “teleprompter glass shards” bullshit? The bullshit idea that Trump’s injury came from glass shards, specifically from his teleprompters, I mean? That one.

There’s also a variant that it’s “glass shards” from somewhere else, and not specifically the teleprompter, but the teleprompter one is the dominant variant that I’ve seen.

Thing is: it doesn’t fucking matter! Without the bullets, there’s no glass shards! The bullets are the proximate cause either way – tho’ I gotta say, this sure as fuck doesn’t look like a “glass shard” to me.

Why does it important to some people that it’s a “glass shard”? Why is this a thing I had to get into fights with people all Sunday? It’s clearly super-attractive to some people, and that’s important. Why?

But more importantly, what do you think you’re doing?! Particularly the teleprompter people! Because conspiracy theory bullshit looks no better on us than it looks on them!

It makes you look, in fact, like a credulous fool.

So apparently I gotta ask: are we really going to start falling for the absolute stupidest, dumbest-ass trivially-disprovable bullshit-grade disinfo now? Really? Stuff you could absolutely positively check yourself in 30 seconds and get a rock-solid disproof? Is that what we’re going to do now?

Because holy shit if that’s what we’re going to do now, then we really are fucked, because I really, really feel like this is somebody testing their centrist/liberal- and left-wing disinfo network to see how well it does, and where they can take you and how easily. And the first answer is bullshitdown, and the second answer appears to be trivially.

So here is RULE NUMBER ONE on “spotting disinformation.” At least, rule number one as I see it.

TO WIT:

If there is a general consensus on a news item, but there is an outlier that is telling you something you find attractive and something you really want to be true, then you need to back the hell off, because while it might be true, it’s way more likely bait.

This doesn’t mean the consensus is always right. To repeat myself, I am not saying the consensus coverage on new news is always right. That is something I am not saying. NOT. I repeat again, NOT saying that.

(And yeah, I have to repeat myself that many times on something like this, because that’s what it seems to take. That, too, I find infuriating.)

In particular, it’s generally not true in science, where the consensus early reporting on new science worth making headlines is generally wrong. Particularly for anything involving characteristics of “suspect classes,” like Black people, Indigenous people, and any and every kind of queer person in the world.

(Consider the ‘gay gene’ reporting in the 1990s, with the study authors actually in the background at their presentation saying ‘DO NOT REPORT THIS AS A GAY GENE, that’s not what this is’ followed immediately by a cut to a CNN reporter saying to camera, “This discovery of a ‘gay gene’…”)

But the vast majority of the time, if the outlier report is something you really want to hear, you need to treat it as if it’s radioactive plague hornets until you are goddamn well sure it’s correct. Or at least viable. Something with some real and solid support under it – and not just something tailored to grab you and people like you.

Because that shiny, shiny candy bite is exactly how disinformation and propaganda specialists hook you in. By offering a sweet, sweet lie you really want to be true.

That is rule one. If it’s that an outlier and that kind of attractive, it’s probably bait.

So.

If you’re reading this, and you’d decided “glass shard” happened, and in particular if it was teleprompter glass, I present to you here, from the original shooting video, the two teleprompters, both visible and apparently fully intact – and certainly not in “shards” – several seconds AFTER Trump’s injury.

That’s how easily this one’s disproved. 30 seconds of looking at a video.

Also, if that’s not enough, here’s a picture of the bullet whizzing past Trump’s head.

And yet so many people on Facebook in particular – for whatever reason, I don’t know why – are defending “glass shard” to an inch of their life. Some even after seeing the teleprompter picture. Because somehow, that’s what they want to believe – so they’re damned well going to.

And it’s bullshit. And also, how we got MAGA.

…

Hopping christ on a pogostick, folks, go sleep it off. And do better tomorrow, now that you have rule one. I know, a lot of you aren’t used to having to do this, aren’t used to hostile and disinformation-friendly press, aren’t used to having to pick out reality from the lies in this kind of way, and I’m sorry, but … you have to get better at it now. Like, right now.

I beg you. Learn to do better.

And don’t take bait.

112 days remain.

[link] #politics #USPol #politics #uspolitics