|
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1598275)
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...72ce62af89.png
And, sadly, now that everyone else hates the police, he can't anymore, because it's too mainstream. Braineack 2019, colorized. |
|
The left actually loves this:
|
|
|
It's True: Liberals Like Cats More Than Conservatives DoBY CHRIS WILSON AND JONATHAN HAIDT FEBRUARY 18, 2014 5:45 AM EST In January, TIME ran a 12-question quiz that guessed your politics based on things like your preference for cats versus dogs and the neatness of your desk. The survey’s questions were all taken from previous research projects that found differences between liberals and conservatives on matters not directly related to politics. Many readers were skeptical, to say the least. The comments section simmered with protests like “Since WHEN does being a cat-lover make one a liberal?” and “Having a neat desk isn’t political.” Loving cats may not make a person a liberal, but it does increase the odds that a person already is one. To see how accurate our survey was, we analyzed the data from 220,192 TIME readers who took the quiz and then volunteered their actual political preferences, and found that all 12 items did in fact predict partisanship correctly. Each graph below represents the average response by ideology for one of the 12 questions. Charts are shaded red if agreement with the statement correlates with conservativism, blue if it correlates with liberalism. Since Libertarians don't have a clear place on the liberal-conservative spectrum, they're graphed here by arrows and the letter 'L' and placed near the ideology that their responses most closely match for each question. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...e404ad580b.png https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...64c2db3f67.png https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...515ad5b372.png Even seemingly innocuous questions like ones about the state of one’s desk or preference for fusion cuisine had at least modest predictive power. A majority of TIME readers, like a majority of Americans, prefer dogs to cats, but conservatives had a significantly stronger preference, on average. Overall, the quiz’s predictions were quite accurate when compared to a respondent’s self-reported ideology. (The correlation coefficient was 0.682, for those of you keeping score at home.) The individual questions varied in their predictive accuracy, from low (but non-negligible) correlation of 0.124 for the “cats versus dogs” question to 0.471 for the statement “I’m proud of my country’s history.” When you add together a bunch of these modest predictors, you end up with a pretty good guess as to how a person votes. Not as good as asking people about their views on taxes, abortion and gun control, but enough to show that partisanship nowadays correlates with many non-political attitudes and behaviors. Interestingly, Libertarians—often considered as being on the political right—fell between the liberal and conservative extremes on most questions. Even when it came to an affinity for nature’s truest libertarians: felines. https://time.com/8293/its-true-liber...servatives-do/ |
Ladies and Gents,
I present to you Joe Perez's favorite news source: :clap: Sound like a bunch of alt-right extremists if you ask me. |
|
look in the fucking mirror.
bonus points if you can do it while maintaining eye contact and without crying |
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1598315)
look in the fucking mirror.
|
Came across an interesting Tweet recently:
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...cef6fb64a6.png Shelby is a writer for a conservative echo-chamber blog called The Daily Caller (it's the kind of ego-stroking site which refers to its subscribers as "Patriots,") and so far as I can tell, she is criticizing NPR for admitting that they, like all other news outlets, are imperfect, and encouraging the reader to keep an open mind and be accepting of new information, even if something which had previously been said, and subsequently found to be untrue, contradicts it. Another way of reading this would be that, by criticizing NPR for admitting that they might make a mistake, she's implicitly putting herself and / or The Daily Caller on a pedestal of journalistic infallibility. So, one entity says "we're not perfect, everyone can make mistakes, and we'll do our best to correct them if we do" and another, in criticizing them for that, essentially says "we are perfect, you can always trust us." Which one of these sounds more like a trustworthy news agency, and which one sounds more like Party Apparatus? |
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1598319)
Came across an interesting Tweet recently:
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...cef6fb64a6.png Shelby is a writer for a conservative echo-chamber blog called The Daily Caller (it's the kind of ego-stroking site which refers to its subscribers as "Patriots,") and so far as I can tell, she is criticizing NPR for admitting that they, like all other news outlets, are imperfect, and encouraging the reader to keep an open mind and be accepting of new information, even if something which had previously been said, and subsequently found to be untrue, contradicts it. Another way of reading this would be that, by criticizing NPR for admitting that they might make a mistake, she's implicitly putting herself and / or The Daily Caller on a pedestal of journalistic infallibility. So, one entity says "we're not perfect, everyone can make mistakes, and we'll do our best to correct them if we do" and another, in criticizing them for that, essentially says "we are perfect, you can always trust us." Which one of these sounds more like a trustworthy news agency, and which one sounds more like Party Apparatus? |
Joe, I can't say I agree with your logic on this one. Might the person simply be pointing out that NPR should be reporting news that has been confirmed and then not need to be retracting/correcting stories?
On every set of building plans I get there is a disclaimer that says these plans need to be verified in the field and field conditions may warrant changing them. Well, what's the point in the plans then? Can't they tell that they have a 4" plumbing pipe, a12" AC vent, and a 6" light fixture all occupying the same space in a soffit that is only 18"? So when I-a lowly sub-contractor without a fancy engineering degree, can see the conflict without going out into the "field"- say that these engineers are not doing their job, I am not implying that I am better than them. I am implying that they need to do their job better and not leave it up to us (the superintendent, plumber, electrician, and mechanical installer) to figure it out in the field. IMO, of course. But, you may very well be correct that a media outlet promoting a certain propaganda will likely point out all the others mistake and try to make themselves look perfect. I wouldn't know as I don't watch/hear/subscribe/follow any of them. |
I guess he means “no”
|
Originally Posted by hector
(Post 1598322)
But, you may very well be correct that a media outlet promoting a certain propaganda will likely point out all the others mistake and try to make themselves look perfect. I wouldn't know as I don't watch/hear/subscribe/follow any of them.
Out of curiosity, I went to the Daily Caller's website and clicked on a few things. One of them was their "Become a paid contributor" link. Here's the page in its entirety: https://dailycaller.com/contributor/ And here's an excerpt which starts at the very top, from which I've trimmed out some boring stuff in the middle: . Tired of waiting tables? Is working the campus cash register SOUL CRUSHINGLY BORING? If you can write quickly and want competitive pay from a high-traffic news outlet, the Daily Caller wants you as a contributor. (...) Contributors will be expected to write current, breaking news stories for online publication. Articles will be approximately 250 words and writers are paid on a per-article basis of $20. With no minimum or maximum work requirements, writing for us will never conflict with school, employment, or family obligations — but the more you write, the more you get paid. There is no trial or probationary period — get hired and start earning from the first story you submit. (...) Writing experience is preferred but not required. . So... .
And yet, to look at their website, and they way they present themselves and their "contributors," one might easily be led to assume that they are a news agency, which is engaged in something resembling journalism. Especially if what you're reading reinforces your existing beliefs. And that's a problem. Because what you get for $20 an article isn't news in the sense of something into which any amount of research or fact-checking has gone. It's just opinion, and not likely well-informed opinion at that. |
Holy crap! At $20 an article I would have to write.... takes off shoes...... takes of son's shoes.... takes of cat's shoes (thankfully she's polydactyl)... Ahhh, forget it, not enough toes for this to make sense. I'd better stay a plumber.
|
Originally Posted by hector
(Post 1598330)
I'd better stay a plumber.
In other news... [EDIT: Damn, how did I miss Xturner's post above about what I'm about to discuss?] When I read the book The Cuckoo's Egg in 1990 or so, I was puzzled by the fact that telecommunications in West Germany were managed exclusively by the Deutsche Bundespost, and thus, their involvement was necessary in the international phone-traces which eventually led back to Markus Hess, a German college student whose hobby was selling US military secrets to the KGB. At the time, I was in occasional contact with a German phone phreak named Thorsten, who frequented a BBS which I was fairly active on. He considered this arrangement to be perfectly normal, and in fact was not aware that the telephone system in the US was owned by a private company. The Bundespost was later broken up in much the same was as Bell Telephone, and today, Deutsche Telekom operates the phone system. But that odd arrangement has always stuck with me. Which is what made reading the following all the more interesting. Now, as a disclaimer, while there have been many articles written today telling this story from varying perspectives, they all seem to link back to one single source, a "document obtained by Yahoo News." Yahoo News, is, well... Yahoo News. After interviewing at their Manhattan office in 2015, I turned down a pretty decent job offer, because I didn't have a good feeling about the place. But, here we are: April 21, 2021 at 03:20 PM ET |
^^ Right, they can pull that off, but getting your package anywhere near on time anymore ?!!? Good luck!
Why am I not surprised |
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1598319)
Came across an interesting Tweet recently:
Another way of reading this would be that, by criticizing NPR for admitting that they might make a mistake, she's implicitly putting herself and / or The Daily Caller on a pedestal of journalistic infallibility. Wake up and stop swallowing the media lies. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:18 AM. |
|
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands