User Tag List

First 123

Results 21 to 24 of 24

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    10,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Yahoo News is particularly bad at this, although i think it's filtered into all media at this point to some degree ... in an attempt to get the pithiest sounding "bite" that will also stir up the most response.

    So many times I'm there looking at articles and getting irked because the title is either misleading or totally slanting the actual comments in an unintended direction (well, unintended by the speaker).
    I stopped reading yahoo news years ago for this very reason.

  2. #22
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,881

    Default

    While we're at this, I REALLY REALLY hate the McGuyver style ones. ones where it's like "This girl uses scissors and a solo cup AND WHAT SHE DOES WITH IT IS AMAZING!!" .. The video, spammed with 100 ads, is a girl cutting a cup in half to make speakers for her computer louder... Something that could be said in one single sentence was turned into an entire page with a wacky title. Those really annoy me.

    I'm starting to think I should have made 'no more click baiting stuff' my new years resolution.

    Quote Originally Posted by tkae. View Post
    1.) I didn't take it a direction it wasn't already going.

    2.) He's not being inaccurately represented, he's being represented from a certain perspective that happens to be more cynical than yours. That's not inaccurate, it's just a subjective point of view.

    3.) "Balanced" points of view in journalism aren't necessarily healthier than admittedly biased ones. Case in point: coverage of the anti-vaccination movement. It's a fringe view that vaccines are dangerous, and yet they're being represented on equal ground as the scientific majority representatives who are citing actual scientific fact. That's not balanced, that's imbalanced via attempt at balance.
    There are inaccuracies. It is not merely a subjective point of view. The title is specifically created for click bait, the words twisted on purpose to create something that did not exist with the words alone, taking the words far out of what is truly being said to help create an article and point about someone/something they want to talk about on an emotional level far beyond normal bias writing, which I'm actually quite okay with actually in and of itself. It is no different than this situation:

    Shark Week Is Lying To People Again | IFLScience
    Shark Week Lied to Scientists to Get Them to Appear in "Documentaries"

    "Technically" the people didn't SAY anything wrong, I mean, they used the actual biologist's quotes ON VIDEO. How can they say they're lying? But half truths are more deceitful than lies. And saying 'based on reality' is not reality. If they guy is a douche, let his actual douchey actions/comments speak for themselves. It's okay to say, "On top of this 'not my cup of tea' analogy, he said 'Gays are stupid and I don't want them in my house'." Or something. Embellishing them, though, more does nothing but harm for your cause and fuels the fire for the opposition to the cause--which is mostly what I take issue with. If you have to CREATE issues, then the issue is probably not big enough to be worth your time and effort. Let the issue speak for itself. Or figure out why it bothers you so if it doesn't hold water.

    Your example of anti-vaccine movements use the very tactics being made fun of in this thread and the ones I'm speaking of here. They are 'represented as science'.. But their foundations are not in science at all. The misrepresent research--just like Forks over Knives and the China Study it was based on did. They cherry pick words from studies, and twist them to their true goals and intentions which may not even be what you were expecting. Which is exactly what click bait does. There is no attempt to be 'balanced' there at all. The movement cannot afford balance, because balance would mean taking a part their own rationales--i.e. that vaccines could actually be safer for both children and adults than the diseases themselves.

    To come full circle, the guy you're complaining about that is 'clearly a homophobe' has plenty of other things illustrating this. Just let that stuff speak for itself. No need to create 100 articles sensationalized. An updated article with all the things said honestly paints a better illustration than TELLING people what to think about a thing.

    It is okay to say:

    NEWS AT 9: Does Kyuuei think Muslim men are inferior to American men?
    Kyu posted several times in typc.. and she said in one thread 'Muslim men are not that attractive to me because religion is a muddy thing in relationships' and in another thread said, 'Muslim men really can treat their women like garbage' and then came out with this whopper here: 'When I was in Iraq I saw Muslim men dead on the street, but it didn't really bother me.' Is Kyu a stereotypical soldier that dislikes Muslims? Does she think Muslim men are beneath her? The comments are pretty shocking for someone that seemed pretty love-everyone-as-they-are. Did the war in Iraq expose her in such a way that she has a negative stance on Muslims in general? We asked Kyu, but she declined to comment.

    It is NOT, however, okay to say:
    NEWS at 9: Kyuuei doesn't care if Muslims die because they aren't attractive! SHOCKING COMMENTS PROVE AMERICA IS RACIST!

    Do you see the difference? One headline is shocking and completely distorts the exact same quotes. It tells people what to think before they ever read the words. It creates a mentality and atmosphere that is not accurate. The former is exploratory, clearly bias, but accurately represents both their bias and the non-biased information being used.

    Even if the article is STILL pretty garbage and not completely 100% accurate since it tries to insert an entire idea unfounded by the little data evidence given, and would lack details about how I went on to say I'd still date a Muslim man if he wasn't a devote muslim and his parents were cool with that, or how I went on to say that once you see people dead so often it starts to numb you and I was in a war zone so it just happened to be muslims I saw dead a lot.. It is at least not lying about what I said or how I feel either. It doesn't say what I am, or try to presume what I am about. It explores and gathers information--even if it is gathered in a bias light meant to make me look bad, it is at least using my own words in separate instances to show that these are not all said in a string of things together on the same day in the context of saying Muslim men are unattractive and deserve to die. Cherry picking still? Sure. But straight up lying about what was said? The former does not, the latter does.

    There is a huge difference.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  3. #23
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tkae. View Post
    1.) I didn't take it a direction it wasn't already going.

    2.) He's not being inaccurately represented, he's being represented from a certain perspective that happens to be more cynical than yours. That's not inaccurate, it's just a subjective point of view.

    3.) "Balanced" points of view in journalism aren't necessarily healthier than admittedly biased ones. Case in point: coverage of the anti-vaccination movement. It's a fringe view that vaccines are dangerous, and yet they're being represented on equal ground as the scientific majority representatives who are citing actual scientific fact. That's not balanced, that's imbalanced via attempt at balance.
    Vaccines *are* dangerous.
    The question is -- how dangerous are they? Juggling flaming torches and chainsaws dangerous, or walking to your own mailbox dangerous?
    The second question is -- what is the danger of not getting vaccinated? To the individual, and to others (herd immunity)?

    What *is* interesting is the "about face" on vaccines -- Bill Maher and Jon Stewart used to be anti-vaccine; the following map comparing non-vaccination rates of children to
    Presidential vote preferences in 2012:
    vacc-rate-2012-electoral-map-2-3-15-4-sml.gif


    and the following tweet is simply priceless:

    https://twitter.com/elnathan/status/561822765402324994
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grey_beard View Post
    Vaccines *are* dangerous.
    The question is -- how dangerous are they?
    Yes, they can be. Both my father and uncle got pneumonia after getting a pneumonia vaccine. My father nearly died from it. My mother got the flu after a flu vaccine. A group of fellas in Special Forces (whom I met personally) nearly died after getting vaccines. Can you imagine being shot at for over 20 years and what almost kills you isn't a bullet, but a vaccine?

    If assessment of the immune system isn't possible prior to any vaccination, there's a potential problem. Take the LA vaccine strains Moraten and Schwarz, for example:

    Their use has dramatically reduced the incidence of measles, from over 100 million cases in the prevaccine era to approximately 31 million cases in 1997. However, fatal infections have been documented in immunodeficient children vaccinated with these strains. The symptoms of infection occur many months after immunization, and the viruses isolated are similar to the original LA vaccine, suggesting that in the absence of an effective host immune response, persistent infection with the vaccine strain can lead to fatal disease.

    J Virol. 1999 Oct; 73(10): 8791–8797. Altered Virulence of Vaccine Strains of Measles Virus after Prolonged Replication in Human Tissue
    I'm not a fan of pull-out-and-pray when having sex any more than I'm a fan of shove a needle in me and pray I'm okay.

Similar Threads

  1. What's the deal with this headlining news story (Casey Anthony)?
    By swordpath in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 09-08-2012, 11:10 AM
  2. [MBTItm] Fs are dishonest to spare feelings Js are brutally honest Y or N
    By yupitsme in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 06-18-2012, 10:18 AM
  3. Which type is the most manipulative and dishonest?
    By Infidel in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-26-2009, 01:03 AM
  4. MBTIc Headlines
    By ThatsWhatHeSaid in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 201
    Last Post: 11-03-2009, 01:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO