lostinlodos has quite handily proven the Network Propaganda book's claim that the Fox-Breitbart nexus builds a unique cultlike religious following that distrusts factual sources for no other reason than they were told to by the orthodoxy:
[t]he consistent pattern that emerges from our data is that, both during the highly divisive election campaign and even more so during the first year of the Trump presidency, there is no left-right division, but rather a division between the right and the rest of the media ecosystem. The right wing of the media ecosystem behaves precisely as the echo-chamber models predict—exhibiting high insularity, susceptibility to information cascades, rumor and conspiracy theory, and drift toward more extreme versions of itself. The rest of the media ecosystem, however, operates as an interconnected network anchored by organizations, both for profit and nonprofit, that adhere to professional journalistic norms."
The explanation for the anti-Clinton narratives' longevity in the news cycle, the data show, is the focus of the right-wing media ecology on the two focal media nodes of Fox News and Breitbart. At times during this period, Breitbart took the lead as an influencer from Fox News, which eventually responded by repositioning itself after Trump's nomination as a solid Trump booster.
In contrast, left-wing media had no single outlet that defined orthodoxy for progressives. Instead, left-of-center outlets worked within the larger sphere of traditional media, and, because they were competing for the rest of the audience that had not committed itself to the Fox/Breitbart ecosystem, were constrained to adhere, mostly, to facts that were confirmable by traditional media institutions associated with the center-left (the New York Times and the Washington Post, say) as well as with the center-right (e.g., the Wall Street Journal). Basically, even if you were an agenda-driven left-oriented publication or online outlet, your dependence on reaching the mainstream for your audience meant that, you couldn't get away with just making stuff up, or with laundering far-left conspiracy theories from more marginal sources.
Network Propaganda's data regarding the right-wing media ecosystem—that it's insular, prefers confirmation of identity and loyalty rather than self-correction, demonizes perceived opponents, and resists disconfirmation of its favored narratives—map well to social-science political-communication theorists Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph Capella's 2008 book, Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh And The Rise Of Conservative Media. In that book, Jamieson and Capella outlined how, as they put it, "these conservative media create a self-protective enclave hospitable to conservative beliefs." As a consequence, they write:
"[t]his safe haven reinforces conservative values and dispositions, holds Republican candidates and leaders accountable to conservative ideals, tightens their audience's ties to the Republican Party, and distances listeners, readers, and viewers from 'liberals," in general, and Democrats, in particular. It also enwraps them in a world in which facts supportive of Democratic claims are contested and those consistent with conservative ones championed."
Believing that all fact-backed sources are leftist lies for no other reason than he gullibly swallows the right's pure projection uncritically.
Republicans can continue to spread a combination of truths and slanted but technically accurate; Democrats can continue to spread blanket fiction, in more places.
[Proyects facts diametrically opposite to reality]
Why omit the part where the funds were only traced because it was bitcoin, which the FBI had the needed control of? If it were monero, they'd have been out of luck.
On the post: Former Trump Lawyer Facing Sanctions In Michigan Now Saying The Things She Said Were Opinions Are Actually Facts
Re:
If you never poste again, it'd go down by about 1/4.
On the post: Disproving The Nonsense About The FBI & Jan. 6th Would Be Easier If The FBI Didn't Have A History Of Entrapping People In Made Up Plots
Re: SO you really want this LIE accepted like "Russia collusion"
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Former Trump Lawyer Facing Sanctions In Michigan Now Saying The Things She Said Were Opinions Are Actually Facts
Re: Errors
Thank you for your post confirming that her accusations are baseless and without proof.
On the post: Former Trump Lawyer Facing Sanctions In Michigan Now Saying The Things She Said Were Opinions Are Actually Facts
Re:
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re: And Techdirt increasingly takes which side of Free Speech?
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Moderation is not speech?
[Asserts facts not in evidence]
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Moderation is not speech?
Note:
By "artificial," pathological liar lostinlodos means "factual."
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Moderation is not speech?
Just because a lawsuit can be filed, doesn't mean it isn't fruadulent, nor is it a "consequence."
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Moderation is not speech?
We have a solution that works. It's called Section 230.
On the post: Changing Section 230 Won't Make The Internet A Kinder, Gentler Place
Re:
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence or law]
On the post: Shake Shack Manager Sues NYPD Officers, Union Reps For Falsely Claiming His Business Sold Cops Poisoned Shakes
They must have figured if there were enough idiots who swallowed the "concrete milkshakes" narrative...
On the post: No, Facebook's Argument In Response To Muslim Advocates' Lawsuit Is Not 'Awkward'; Facebook Caving On 230 Is What's Awkward
Re: Re:
It must be embarassing to Portent, that the biggest weakness in his ranting is that everyone else is literate.
On the post: Senator Wicker Introduces Bill To Guarantee The Internet Sucks
Re: Re: Moving Goal Posts
Your illiteracy does not make conspiracy.
On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation
Re:
https://i.imgur.com/eXRuXcr.jpg
On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation
Re: Re:
lostinlodos has quite handily proven the Network Propaganda book's claim that the Fox-Breitbart nexus builds a unique cultlike religious following that distrusts factual sources for no other reason than they were told to by the orthodoxy:
Believing that all fact-backed sources are leftist lies for no other reason than he gullibly swallows the right's pure projection uncritically.
On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation
Re: It’s quite simple
[Proyects facts diametrically opposite to reality]
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190117/15361941413/splinters-our-discontent-review-netw ork-propaganda.shtml
On the post: FBI's Recovery Of Colonial Pipeline Bitcoin Ransom Highlights How The 'Ban Crypto To Stop Ransomware' Cries Were Wrong Again
Why omit the part where the funds were only traced because it was bitcoin, which the FBI had the needed control of? If it were monero, they'd have been out of luck.
On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation
If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content
FTFY
On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation
Re: Re:
Why refer to yourself as a plural? Because you think the voices in your head are real people?
On the post: Senator Wicker Introduces Bill To Guarantee The Internet Sucks
Re:
https://i.imgur.com/a6e0MP9.jpg
Next >>