RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Trump Demands Facebook Investigate Why Obama's Post Got So Many Likes Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Wednesday, 07 August 2019 13:37

Borowitz writes: "A furious Donald J. Trump has demanded that Facebook investigate why a status update posted by former President Barack Obama on Monday has received so many likes."

Former President Barack Obama. (photo: White House)
Former President Barack Obama. (photo: White House)


Trump Demands Facebook Investigate Why Obama's Post Got So Many Likes

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

07 August 19

 

The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."


furious Donald J. Trump has demanded that Facebook investigate why a status update posted by former President Barack Obama on Monday has received so many likes.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday morning, Trump said that the more than eight hundred and fifty thousand likes that Obama’s post had garnered as of Tuesday night were “phony,” and called the seeming popularity of the post a “rigged hoax.”

“There is absolutely no way that eight hundred and fifty thousand people liked Obama’s post,” he said. “I know a lot of people, and absolutely none of them like Obama.”

Trump said that, in addition to investigating Obama’s likes, he was demanding that Facebook remove several hundred thousand of Obama’s likes and “give them to me instead.”

Calling the former President’s Facebook post “as long and boring as a book,” Trump slammed Obama for being “terrible at social media, which is the most important part of a President’s job.”

“In that post he uses words like ‘motivations,’ ‘proliferate,’ and ‘unequivocally,’ ” Trump said. “How could over eight hundred thousand people like a post full of words that no one has ever heard of?”

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: When the President Is a Bigot, the Poison Spreads Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49800"><span class="small">Susan Rice, The New York Times</span></a>   
Wednesday, 07 August 2019 12:07

Rice writes: "It's hard to calculate the damage that President Trump's overt racism and almost daily attacks on black and brown people are having on the fabric of our nation."

Supporters applaud US President Donald Trump. (photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)
Supporters applaud US President Donald Trump. (photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)


When the President Is a Bigot, the Poison Spreads

By Susan Rice, The New York Times

07 August 19


The consequences ricochet around the world and embolden our adversaries.

t’s hard to calculate the damage that President Trump’s overt racism and almost daily attacks on black and brown people are having on the fabric of our nation. With white supremacy bolstered from the Oval Office, hate crimes and domestic terrorism incidents are increasing, including, it appears, Saturday’s mass shooting in El Paso.

At the same time, immigrants and native-born Americans live in constant fear of law enforcement officials emboldened to think they can act with impunity. Still, Mr. Trump revels in ripping off the fragile scab over the lingering sore that is our country’s historical racial divide, as if to ensure it never heals.

The president’s appalling goal, quite simply, is to pit Americans against one another for crass political purposes as well as, it seems, to vent his unabashed personal prejudice. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress by and large amplify his message through their deafening silence, abdicating their responsibility to serve our country above any political master and making a mockery of their claim to be “the party of Lincoln.”

READ MORE

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Trump, Tax Cuts and Terrorism Print
Wednesday, 07 August 2019 10:40

Kruman writes: "Why has the Republican Party become a systematic enabler of terrorism?"

Economist Paul Krugman. (photo: Getty Images)
Economist Paul Krugman. (photo: Getty Images)


Trump, Tax Cuts and Terrorism

By Paul Kruman, The New York Times

07 August 19


Why do Republicans enable right-wing extremism?

hy has the Republican Party become a systematic enabler of terrorism?

Don’t pretend to be shocked. Just look at G.O.P. responses to the massacre in El Paso. They have ranged from the ludicrous (blame video games!) to the almost honest (who would have expected Ted Cruz, of all people, to speak out against white supremacy?). But as far as I can tell, not one prominent Republican has even hinted at the obvious link between Donald Trump’s repeated incitements to violence and the upsurge in hate crimes.

So the party remains in lock step behind a man who has arguably done more to promote racial violence than any American since Nathan Bedford Forrest, who helped found the Ku Klux Klan, a terrorist organization if there ever was one — and who was recently honored by the Republican governor of Tennessee.

READ MORE

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
We Must Reject the Normalization of Racism Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=45324"><span class="small">Barack Obama, Barack Obama's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Wednesday, 07 August 2019 08:24

Obama writes: "We should soundly reject language coming out of the mouths of any of our leaders that feeds a climate of fear and hatred or normalizes racist sentiments."

Barack Obama. (photo: Getty Images)
Barack Obama. (photo: Getty Images)


We Must Reject the Normalization of Racism

By Barack Obama, Barack Obama's Facebook Page

07 August 19

 

ichelle and I grieve with all the families in El Paso and Dayton who endured these latest mass shootings. Even if details are still emerging, there are a few things we already know to be true.

First, no other nation on Earth comes close to experiencing the frequency of mass shootings that we see in the United States. No other developed nation tolerates the levels of gun violence that we do. Every time this happens, we’re told that tougher gun laws won’t stop all murders; that they won’t stop every deranged individual from getting a weapon and shooting innocent people in public places. But the evidence shows that they can stop some killings. They can save some families from heartbreak. We are not helpless here. And until all of us stand up and insist on holding public officials accountable for changing our gun laws, these tragedies will keep happening.

Second, while the motivations behind these shootings may not yet be fully known, there are indications that the El Paso shooting follows a dangerous trend: troubled individuals who embrace racist ideologies and see themselves obligated to act violently to preserve white supremacy. Like the followers of ISIS and other foreign terrorist organizations, these individuals may act alone, but they’ve been radicalized by white nationalist websites that proliferate on the internet. That means that both law enforcement agencies and internet platforms need to come up with better strategies to reduce the influence of these hate groups.

But just as important, all of us have to send a clarion call and behave with the values of tolerance and diversity that should be the hallmark of our democracy. We should soundly reject language coming out of the mouths of any of our leaders that feeds a climate of fear and hatred or normalizes racist sentiments; leaders who demonize those who don’t look like us, or suggest that other people, including immigrants, threaten our way of life, or refer to other people as sub-human, or imply that America belongs to just one certain type of people. Such language isn’t new – it’s been at the root of most human tragedy throughout history, here in America and around the world. It is at the root of slavery and Jim Crow, the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. It has no place in our politics and our public life. And it’s time for the overwhelming majority of Americans of goodwill, of every race and faith and political party, to say as much – clearly and unequivocally.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Why Unmoderated Online Forums Always Degenerate Into Fascism Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=39482"><span class="small">Keith A. Spencer, Jacobin</span></a>   
Wednesday, 07 August 2019 08:24

Spencer writes: "8chan was not unique: selection biases and online psychology mean all unmoderated forums will devolve."

A mourner visits a memorial for the victims of the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas. (photo: John Locher/AP)
A mourner visits a memorial for the victims of the mass shooting in El Paso, Texas. (photo: John Locher/AP)


Why Unmoderated Online Forums Always Degenerate Into Fascism

By Keith A. Spencer, Salon

07 August 19


8chan was not unique: selection biases and online psychology mean all unmoderated forums will devolve

he website 8chan, an image and message board modeled after 4chan but committed to even less moderation, is in the news again after the revelation that the El Paso shooter used the forum to post his far-right manifesto moments before his killing spree. If confirmed, that would mark the third time a right-wing mass shooter has posted his plans and/or manifesto on the site.

8chan has faced massive criticism in the past 48 hours, and the original founder has even called to shut it down. Yet such public hand-wringing, and the fixation on 8chan alone, belies the true problem. For it is not merely 8chan's peculiar situation that makes it a haven for the far-right and white nationalism. Any online forum with the same combination of anonymity and lack of moderation will experience the same degeneration. Talking about 8chan as though it were unique in some way as a right-wing, white nationalist haven is disingenuous; the problem is far vaster, and far more intrinsic to the way that the internet functions.

“Online disinhibition” is the term psychologists use to explain why anonymous online masses behave in a manner that is crueler and more hostile than interactions we experience in real life. As I’ve written before, the lack of accountability, relative ease of anonymity, and the indirect nature of online communication combine to create an oft-toxic atmosphere online. Thus, on a forum like Twitter or Reddit, one person attempting to rebut another person's point is much more likely to exhibit hostility, to swear at or dehumanize them.

In essence, it is hard to remember an ideological opponent’s humanity online, as you cannot see nor perceive them — they are merely words on a screen. Those with larger online followings, or who post about politics, or who are women or another minority group, suffer more hatred and attacks from strangers. This, in part, explains why irony has become such a common online personality trait, particularly among Extremely Online millennials; adopting an irony-poisoned disposition is actually a great way to protect oneself from these kinds of attacks. Indeed, approaching online communication with ironic distance is a good defense against cruelty.

Yet the major online forums — sites like Reddit, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube — all include moderation tools to some degree. Intensely cruel, sexist or racist comments on any of those platforms are often filtered out so most users never see them.

Yet there are some sites whose creators eschew moderation in favor of online free-for-alls — and this category includes the -chan forums, like 4chan and, yes, 8chan.

The creators of these kinds of sites often fancy themselves free speech activists, as though being against moderation and in favor of free speech were the same thing (they're not). If these forums are marketplaces of ideas, it is curious that they have become dens of far-right hate — fringe political positions, and not at all representative of how most online denizens think and feel. How did the -chan sites devolve to this state?

To put it bluntly, the -chan forums have experienced what we call a “selection effect” in statistics. In other words, the people who spend time on, say, 8chan, and who express themselves on that site, are not a random sample size of the population; there is a bias that creeps in. Angela Nagle, perhaps the foremost chronicler of the history of the online alt-right, has pointed out before that these sites have a long history of users trafficking in transgressive, edgy, sometimes ironic and sometimes earnest far-right and white supremacist language and memes.

Of course, these -chan sites are open to anyone; you or I could navigate to 4chan right now and post whatever we want, without having to create an account, give up an email address or post a profile pic. Yet over time, those who have a distaste for edgy or white supremacist or Nazi posts will vacate the premises, leaving only those who can stomach it — who, again, are a mix of earnest fascists and nihilistic trolls.

Thus, in time, those who are earnest about their white supremacist or fascist feelings will feel at home there, and come there earnestly — and those types will outweigh those of other political stripes, and even outweigh the nihilist posters and lurkers who view such content with ironic detachment.

Hence message boards like 8chan can and will devolve into havens for far-right hate, at first because some users post such shocking content jokingly, and some in earnest, until the racist and hateful voices drown out the others.

Notably, 8chan regarded itself as a true protector of so-called “free speech,” more so than 4chan, whose moderators had deleted some of the more libelous GamerGate-related posts.

I don’t relish having to report this or diagnose how these things work. This should be regarded as some kind of online psychology law, so that we can stop misunderstanding what “free speech” is and we can stop letting the right claim that term as though they actually understand what it means.

Moreover, that unmoderated and unregulated online spaces will devolve in this manner should give libertarians pause. Anyone who thinks a lack of regulation will result only in good things needs to re-assess their ideology.

In any case, be very wary of any unmoderated online site that bills itself as a haven or a protector of “free speech.” Because of the selection effect and the reasons listed above, such forums will almost always devolve into fascist or white nationalist garbage fires, even as their administrators cry foul at those who seek to ban or moderate their excesses. This is just how it works: The combination of online psychology (the disinhibition effect), selection bias, and the weeding out of those who can’t stomach it will inevitably result in just another 8chan. 8chan may or may not be gone, but it is likely that another e-nihilist will naively start another unmoderated online forum, claim the mantle of free speech, and shrug his shoulders at all the far-right content right up until the minute that a mass shooter uploads their plans.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 Next > End >>

Page 801 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN