Sound-bites, tweets, FB rants, sexy texts - all are changing our lives

[Statistikhengst]

....and our politics.

Consider this:

people umbraged about racist FB convos, like this one:

Boston University prof in racist tweet flap accused of trolling white rape victim Fox News

Or pols who get canned for sexy-texting their affairs:

Missouri Republican House speaker steps down over sexting scandal Reuters

Anthony Weiner Resigns as Hecklers Ask About the Length of His Penis

Or Bush fucks up a softball question, then gives four other answers in four days and the media lights up:




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a serious political discussion.

How is the 24/7 news cycles and the strong advance of social media affecting how people behave - and how do these things affect voters? Are people jumping too quickly? Are we getting caught up in a "24 hour scandal-umbrage mode"? And what can we do to stop it?

Take time and think about this before you post. Notice that I posted four things, two very critical of something that a person on the Left did, and two things very critical of something that a person on the Right did. But that's kind of immaterial. The point is that the magnifying glass has gotten larger, more intensive and people are seeing it more often, because more and more get their news primarily from the net.

And away we go...

 

[Mac1958]

To begin with your last question, I have no fucking idea how to stop it.

The one thing I wonder about the most is how otherwise intelligent people somehow completely lose their senses when they're texting and/or emailing and/or posting. If a politician sends a picture of his dick to a 17 year old girl, is there any thought process whatsoever addressing the potential hazards of such an act?

Regarding its effects, the virtual wall of sheer information now cannot be helpful. Lies, distortions and rumors (let alone actual facts) now travel and are amplified (and distorted further) at the speed of light. This can only mean that people are forming opinions based on completely one-sided or completely erroneous input.

Is the average person really going to take the time to fully investigate a rumor? Um, no. Then they act and vote based on bad information.

Good questions. How do you bring back sanity when it's completely out of the bag?

.

 

[Statistikhengst]

To begin with your last question, I have no fucking idea how to stop it.

The one thing I wonder about the most is how otherwise intelligent people somehow completely lose their senses when they're texting and/or emailing and/or posting. If a politician sends a picture of his dick to a 17 year old girl, is there any thought process whatsoever addressing the potential hazards of such an act?

Regarding its effects, the virtual wall of sheer information now cannot be helpful. Lies, distortions and rumors (let alone actual facts) now travel and are amplified (and distorted further) at the speed of light. This can only mean that people are forming opinions based on completely one-sided or completely erroneous input.

Is the average person really going to take the time to fully investigate a rumor? Um, no. Then they act and vote based on bad information.

Good questions. How do you bring back sanity when it's completely out of the bag?

.

The green that I bolded: I think it's because people think they can hide behind a wall of anonymity that does not really exist. Behind that wall is code that people can break and ISPs are easy to trace.

 

[Mac1958]

To begin with your last question, I have no fucking idea how to stop it.

The one thing I wonder about the most is how otherwise intelligent people somehow completely lose their senses when they're texting and/or emailing and/or posting. If a politician sends a picture of his dick to a 17 year old girl, is there any thought process whatsoever addressing the potential hazards of such an act?

Regarding its effects, the virtual wall of sheer information now cannot be helpful. Lies, distortions and rumors (let alone actual facts) now travel and are amplified (and distorted further) at the speed of light. This can only mean that people are forming opinions based on completely one-sided or completely erroneous input.

Is the average person really going to take the time to fully investigate a rumor? Um, no. Then they act and vote based on bad information.

Good questions. How do you bring back sanity when it's completely out of the bag?

.

The green that I bolded: I think it's because people think they can hide behind a wall of anonymity that does not really exist. Behind that wall is code that people can break and ISPs are easy to trace.

That's why I said "otherwise intelligent". Somehow convincing yourself that you can get away with it is one helluva act of delusion.

I realize we tend to think with our dicks, but jeez.

.

 

[occupied]

Simple rule, never post anything you would not want your mom to see.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

...unless you're a Democrat

 

[Statistikhengst]

...unless you're a Democrat

Frank, you are missing the point. Try again.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Why should one expect privacy when they have their electronic fingerprint on fb, twitter, and every social media out there?

 

[Disir]

I think there are several issues.

Texting and FB have a tendency to give the illusion of privacy and that you are talking to an intimate circle of friends. The FB format has changed how people communicate. It is vastly different from forums where you can expand on something or delve more deeply into a topic. It's the primary reason that I hate FB. Twitter is even worse because it's down to 140 characters of ignorance.

That's a problem for regular folks. Regular folks will either do their own investigation or they won't. They either recognize the difference between objective and subjective or they don't. They either utilize critical thinking skills or they don't. How many people investigate the rumors in small towns or neighborhoods irl? It's going to run about the same.

It's a gold mine for PR trolls and those paid to instigate shit and present a particular point of view- rose by any other name and all.

The first article on Saida Grundy is a prime example. The two articles within the text have nothing to do with rape. So, how did we get from point A to point B? The screen shot is only Saida going off on the woman but not the entire conversation. Yet, Saida is labeled as trolling by an organization that has it's own trolls. We are missing a lot of information. All of this started over one line in a short speech that has been an ongoing argument from a little before the second wave.

How to combat it? Well, privacy looks like it's going to be a painful issue that individuals are going to have to learn. The rest is just carrying on as usual: reading through information and asking questions and the like.

 

[Misty]

Simple rule, never post anything you would not want your mom to see.

My mom is dead. I can post anything I want. :/

On a serious note: the government will eventually regulate the internet and it will become like television.

Bitches and damns and an occasional lesbian kiss.