Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at 87. - 🦀

Destacado
thismanlies dijo:
Imagine spending your Sunday writing an article because you think your readers are too stupid to know a joke when they see one.
Presiona para expandir...
I can only imagine that the writer had a deadline to get an article out and (somehow) couldn't find any articles from any actual news sources to debunk (um, how about pretty much every article about the Kenosha incident?), so they swallowed their pride and plucked the low-hanging fruit.

Or maybe they have no pride in the first place. I guess that's possible too.
 
dinoman dijo:
Why are they fact-checking satire??? What kind of fucking retard would believe this was real???
Presiona para expandir...
Ones with a job writing fact checking articles unfortunately. I think it started last year with Snopes "fact checking" some Babylon Bee articles shared on Facebook and rating them false/fake/fake news or whatever. The Bee took offense at that seeing as that risked their stuff getting banned from Facebook which would hurt their revenue, so they disputed it mostly successfully. Snopes got pissy at being called out, and effectively doubled down by creating a rating category of "labeled satire" for stuff like the Bee and similar sites published that it didn't like. The idea of "fact checking" obvious satire articles to declare them satire appears to have spread since then. Though I'm not sure if it's fact checkers looking for an easy article to write, or if it's fact checkers thinking people are that dumb.
 
A_throwaway_name62919 dijo:
Ones with a job writing fact checking articles unfortunately. I think it started last year with Snopes "fact checking" some Babylon Bee articles shared on Facebook and rating them false/fake/fake news or whatever. The Bee took offense at that seeing as that risked their stuff getting banned from Facebook which would hurt their revenue, so they disputed it mostly successfully. Snopes got pissy at being called out, and effectively doubled down by creating a rating category of "labeled satire" for stuff like the Bee and similar sites published that it didn't like. The idea of "fact checking" obvious satire articles to declare them satire appears to have spread since then. Though I'm not sure if it's fact checkers looking for an easy article to write, or if it's fact checkers thinking people are that dumb.
Presiona para expandir...
I remember that but god damn, it's so fucking stupid, you could just retract the rating and admit you fucked up.
 
dinoman dijo:
I remember that but god damn, it's so fucking stupid, you could just retract the rating and admit you fucked up.
Presiona para expandir...
If they did that, some people (probably a statistically irrelevant portion of their readers) would start asking themselves what other bullshit they lied about/got wrong/etc. and it would cause a loss in traffic.
 
OnMoTi dijo:
If they did that, some people (probably a statistically irrelevant portion of their readers) would start asking themselves what other bullshit they lied about/got wrong/etc. and it would cause a loss in traffic.
Presiona para expandir...

I recall someone saying something about news, and how when you specialize in something, you read an article in the news and go "This is complete nonsense, it's all wrong, and disgustingly so" but then when you're done with that article you move on to the rest that you're not an expert in and for some reason forget about how that first article was wrong and assume the rest is completely accurate. A retraction has that effect on readers. They go "Oh, that was wrong, huh? Wild" and then move on to the next article as if the news has never been and is never wrong, and the same with Snopes. They've been caught being wrong before, but somehow people just move on to the next 'fact check' and forget that Snopes has ever been wrong.

Snopes just doesn't correct itself - like newspapers are loathe to retract except in tiny back pages to avoid liability - because they want to control the narrative as much as possible, and that includes lying and manipulating the truth.
 
Allanon dijo:
I recall someone saying something about news, and how when you specialize in something, you read an article in the news and go "This is complete nonsense, it's all wrong, and disgustingly so" but then when you're done with that article you move on to the rest that you're not an expert in and for some reason forget about how that first article was wrong and assume the rest is completely accurate. A retraction has that effect on readers. They go "Oh, that was wrong, huh? Wild" and then move on to the next article as if the news has never been and is never wrong, and the same with Snopes. They've been caught being wrong before, but somehow people just move on to the next 'fact check' and forget that Snopes has ever been wrong.

Snopes just doesn't correct itself - like newspapers are loathe to retract except in tiny back pages to avoid liability - because they want to control the narrative as much as possible, and that includes lying and manipulating the truth.
Presiona para expandir...
It's called the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect
 
A_throwaway_name62919 dijo:
I think it started last year with Snopes "fact checking" some Babylon Bee articles shared on Facebook and rating them false/fake/fake news or whatever. The Bee took offense at that seeing as that risked their stuff getting banned from Facebook which would hurt their revenue [...]
Presiona para expandir...

I think that's the whole reason why Snopes & WapPo keep "fact-checking" satire that mocks wokeness.

They don't care that it makes them look ridiculous to readers, because their purpose is no longer to cater to readers - it's to game the Social Media algorithms.

They're fully aware of the power to censor that they've been given by Facebook, and are exploiting it as much as they can in the service of the Woke Religion.
 
dinoman dijo:
Why are they fact-checking satire??? What kind of fucking retard would believe this was real???
Presiona para expandir...
Some people, especially the Facebook boomers tend to mistake satire for real news.
A_throwaway_name62919 dijo:
Ones with a job writing fact checking articles unfortunately. I think it started last year with Snopes "fact checking" some Babylon Bee articles shared on Facebook and rating them false/fake/fake news or whatever. The Bee took offense at that seeing as that risked their stuff getting banned from Facebook which would hurt their revenue, so they disputed it mostly successfully. Snopes got pissy at being called out, and effectively doubled down by creating a rating category of "labeled satire" for stuff like the Bee and similar sites published that it didn't like. The idea of "fact checking" obvious satire articles to declare them satire appears to have spread since then. Though I'm not sure if it's fact checkers looking for an easy article to write, or if it's fact checkers thinking people are that dumb.
Presiona para expandir...
The Babylon Bee is like the Fox News of satirical news. Once again, some conservative Internet boomers take them literally.
 
polyester dijo:
They don't care that it makes them look ridiculous to readers, because their purpose is no longer to cater to readers - it's to game the Social Media algorithms.

They're fully aware of the power to censor that they've been given by Facebook, and are exploiting it as much as they can in the service of the Woke Religion.
Presiona para expandir...

You are correct.

5406.png
EjKRavhXcAEuq6h.jpeg
EjKRavgWoAEedC-.jpeg
https://twitter.com/BGOnTheScene/status/1311270335182970881 (https://archive.vn/ZMo5s)

5410.png
https://twitter.com/BGOnTheScene/status/1311272450798301186 (https://archive.vn/6UMTA)
 
Habby Birthday, Ruthie!!🎂 and to commemorate such a swell ol' gal on her special day, I'm going to post this last photo of her when she was still alive: officiating a Jewish wedding! ✡️
👩‍⚖️
👰‍♀️ 🤵‍♂️​


R B G , R I P.jpg

Archived: 1, 2
 

Archivos adjuntos

  • R B G , R I P.jpg
    R B G , R I P.jpg
    424.5 KB · Vistas: 78
Última edición por un moderador:
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo