94 points

The biggest thing that I can see that needs to be done would be shutting down “news” organizations like FOX News, OAN, and Newsmax. Also, breaking up online movements like Q where blatant misinformation is spread as if it’s proven truth.

Now, HOW you do that without massive first amendment violations, I don’t know. You would also need to be careful how it’s structured because that could easily be used to shut down anyone left of center should a Republicans take the presidency/control Congress.

permalink
report
reply
38 points

Gotta look at that right wing radio cabal also

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Since that is over actual airwaves, reinstating the Fairness Doctrine would fix that very fast.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Extend FCC regs and licensing to cable and streaming services while we’re at it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Education and critical thinking skills. Which is why they want to defund public schools so all children can be indoctrinated in “Christian” private schools.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

you do it with massive funding to public education for generations.

which is why massive first amendment violations are more likely

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There’s no need to shut them down:

“The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints. In 1987, the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

The problem, even if we reinstated this, is that this applied to broadcast only. This wouldn’t apply to cable channels. Neither would it apply to Internet groups. Both of those would still be free to spout full blown lies and conspiracy theories dressed up as “news.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It would definitely need updating to include cable, things have changed a lot since 1987. As for the internet, I don’t see how that could be enforced other than to classify sites as publishers and make them liable for the content they host.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Shutting down Facebook would be huge. It’s a cesspool of propaganda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

A lot of social media and sites with algorithms are problematic. They tend to steer people to content that’s more and more radical in nature. You start out with innocuous stuff, but the more extreme the content, the bigger the reaction, and thus the algorithm will guide the user to more of that content. (Ryan George illustrated this perfectly: https://youtu.be/x1aZEz8BQiU?si=g3xw0tbDV-4vSyCH )

permalink
report
parent
reply
86 points

Stop mentioning Hillary. She’s old news. She’s as relevant to 2023 politics as hunter biden.

permalink
report
reply
22 points
*

No kidding, I don’t know why she feels the need to insert herself in this year’s politics with this super divisive “cult deprogramming” language/narrative. Not that a lot of folks don’t need to step down from the rhetoric of violence and demagoguery that’s a big part of MAGA, they absolutely, do… but seriously, Hillary, you are such an unnecessary bull in the china shop on this right now. Like her or hate her, I think it’s a pretty objective statement that bringing the temperature down and bringing people together just isn’t something her presence and choice of language in this debate is going to accomplish.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

She shares the blame for Trump being elected. She campaigned shittily and she was a shitty candidate. The DNC conspiracy to prop her up as the chosen nominee is also to blame.

Those elements combined with Obama hate from Trumptards and the Russian propaganda all over social media produced the result we got.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

She campaigned shittily and she was a shitty candidate.

That literally IS Russian propaganda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

She’s arrogant. Simple as.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Well, did she insert herself here or did someone do it for her for clickbait

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Probably because she’s not planning on running so she can say what she really thinks without giving a fuck about whether it offends some people’s delicate sensibilities?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Came in here to say basically this. The fact that they used Hilary as the image for this articles headline killed any credibility instantly. She is not relevant and hasn’t been since she lost. There is zero positives to bringing her up. Unless you want an example of exactly how not to run a presidential campaign.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I just clicked because I wanted to be sure she wasn’t running in 2024

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What? You mean to say it isn’t her turn?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I saw the link was from Salon.com… as relevant to politics as TMZ is to climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The thumbnail with her in it made sure I wasn’t going to open the article. Her bullshit backroom campaign from the primaries through the election gave Trump the Oval Office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Yes let’s all continue ignoring the people who were warned us about the dangers of a Trump presidency.

Surely she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Also she is not wrong.

But you know fake internet points on a reddit knock off matter more, apparently.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Literally everyone with half a fucking brain knew Trump would be terrible. The fact that she was so unlikable and ran such a bad campaign that people didn’t bother to show up and vote for her tells you everything. She needs to shut the fuck up, and disappear.

The mere sight of her face makes me not want to vote Democrat. I never was one, and her attempts to shame me into voting for her only made me think about that more. The “big tent party” needs more than fear mongering to win elections. I don’t really care for Joe Biden either, but I didn’t feel ill voting for him. He didn’t tell me I owed it to him, that I had to vote for him or I was deplorable. He at least said a few things that made me want to vote.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

I’m not saying she’s wrong. I’m saying she’s irrelevant at this point. if for some reason you don’t like this social network, you should go back to Reddit

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

I have a hard time taking this article seriously. I don’t understand why it feels the need to tout HC so fiercely. I guess she was right about “deplorables” but everyone else was correct in pegging her as an out of touch elite. The DNC’s inability to back candidates that can help working class people continually emboldens right-wing extremists. It’s not hard to see how the Dems’ center-right stances open the door for far-right reactions. Yes, they are deplorables but HC is not one of the good guys.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Republicans are programmed due to their echo chambers. People who don’t even follow the news have been shown to be more informed than Republicans who watch and listen to conservative media.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points

Just curious, do you think the programming due to echo chambers applies to Democrats as well?

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

I think it’s pretty obvious one side is operating totally outside of reality where the other is not. Are democrats peddling stolen election lies and denying the existence of COVID?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

The research doesn’t indicate this. Everyone is prone to echo chambers, but left leaning folks tend to have more diversified news sources, which is the balance to negate echo chambers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

If only people knew the truth! The issue is: That’s not how information actually works. Despite what you are told, social media and the internet often increase the range of views to which people are exposed. Algorithms are less likely to create a echo chamber for you than living in a neighborhood surrounded by Republicans with limited media.

So what are echo chambers, really? They are epistemic bubbles, where other voices are not heard; in echo chambers, other voices are actively undermined. When they get contrary information that doesn’t match their preconceived beliefs, they dismiss it. It confirms what they already believe—they’re wrong.

While privately owned social media companies can influence us, they’re hardly the only things that do. Our core ideologies and values are determined by everything from where we grew up to whom we love, to the actual impact of politics on our lives. Fixing Facebook wouldn’t solve the problem of many echo chambers—your family’s opinions, your friend’s bigoted talking points—even if it’s a good idea.

In a way, those who worry about echo chambers are too hopeful. Many voters really do want Trump, Brexit, and other things that liberals abhor. A lot of people do not care, deep down, about democracy. Better information might not be a panacea for that, even if it would slow down a conspiracy theory like QAnon.

That is the main difference of the two sides, Liberals get a multifaceted message with various perspectives and they latch onto those messages that most resonate with them. Conservatives on the other hand only get one perspective and thus rarely hear opposing views in context.

Which side you land on largely has to do with your personal environment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It does. Their propaganda is that equality matters but they maintain status quo with minimal progress. They definitely prioritize corporate interests over gen pop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Of course it does

The Internet has made people flock to places where people think like them.

Additionally, FaceBook, Google News, and many other sites intentionally show users material that it knows they will interact with to trigger dopamine releases. It’s addictive by design.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I don’t understand why the DNC (as in the actual organization, not Democrat voters) is so god damn obsessed with Hillary. It feels like they would crown her queen if they could. Makes me wonder if she has some dirt on key people in their organization or something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I think it has something to do with Democrats still feeling “hurt” over the absurdity of the Clinton impeachment and other sham issues Republicans have with her, that they have some need to redeem her image. Letting her go feels like accepting a loss.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Are they obsessed, or is it just that she’s not campaigning for anything and so she’s ripe for the media junket?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I have a hard time taking this article seriously.

Not a surprise given it’s from Salon. It’s a shitrag. I haven’t read this article but I’ve noticed a pattern based on other articles being posted around Lemmy. A third is rabble-rousing and pandering to the virtue signaling far left. Half is adjacent filler content. The rest is a valid meaningful point worthy of real discussion and has little to do with the headline.

Just noting the comment below about “Republicans are programmed due to their echo chambers”… Dude, if you believe that’s a republican-only phenomenon, you have been programmed by the echo chamber you follow. I’d love a source for “people who don’t follow the news have been shown to be more informed than republicans”.
Speaking of “echo chambers”, that full of shit comment is getting upvoted. You might find yourself currently inside the echo chamber.

As a liberal progressive, I’m worried that so many of us are falling prey to the tactics that have worked for conservative media for decades. I thought we were supposed to be more intelligent. It seems like tribalism really is all that matters - intellectualism be damned.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’d love a source for “people who don’t follow the news have been shown to be more informed than republicans”.

https://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah, it’s not hard to find. Shame you had to do it for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Back in the day, their grandparents happily filled public swimming pools with cement rather than accept allowing ‘others’ to have a good time.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Defunding and privatization of public schools also started for similar reasons

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Prison terms would be really helpful.

You know, equitable application of the law.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 385K

    Comments