Youtube sucks the biggest balls
" More condescension. Might as well answer it with some some then - you're not a media analyst, you're unemployed (by your own admission). [Removed By Support] At least you've admitted you're not willing to do put in the effort now. So then eat some humble pie and stop talking down to everyone. As for your google searches, I already told you you'd have to do better than that. Besides, for a media analyst, you seem remarkably ignorant about how google works. Did you perhaps forget that search results are personalized? Come now, I know you can do better. But that would require you to care. Not for the rest of us, but at least for backing up your own ego? Provide the data. Provide the evidence. Don't tell us to 'do our own research' to back your claim. And if you don't feel you can do that here, then you're kinda serving as an exhibit for some of the harm censorship causes. And no, you don't get to fall back on fallacious No True Scotsman arguments to weasel out of it. Last edited by RoryF_GGG#0000 on Nov 28, 2021, 7:56:13 PM
|
|
|
Oh come on, that post was beautiful, why delete it? I completely expected the know-it-all to come up with the PM argument and he failed but I PMed him anyway because I am such a good guy.
|
|
" Ironically, you're the one who's pretended to know better than others. I'm the one who's been arguing for respecting other people's maturity. But I did get your links. And even they fail you - 1) Fails to show the majority believes in any of the conspiracy theories it asked about - in fact it shows the opposite! The only question on which there was a somewhat even split between believers and skeptics in countries concerned a certain controversial ... popularity contest for high office. And even on that it was a roughly even split. And for plenty of questions EVERY country had only a minority of people on board with the idea (climate change, aliens, aids, the moon landings). The results demolish your thesis. Tbf, even you admitted it probably wouldn't be a majority. But you were still okay subjecting everyone to censorship in order to get back at this minority. Good luck making the case for making the internet suck for everyone in order to combat a minority of people. And is it even effective? Let's see - 2) The second link concerns Covid alone, unlike the larger group of conspiracy theories covered by the survey mentioned above (which didn't cover Covid). It literally starts off admitting censorship isn't simply about misinformation - " It then spends several paragraphs demolishing the "social media platforms are private companies" defense, using multiple lines of argument (deception, monopolization, vulnerability to state control). Then it shifts to its main thesis of Covid misinformation - " It also acknowledges similar doubts to what some here have raised before ("who exactly defines and how which information is deemed to be false or harmful?"), although I'm not going to pursue that issue much as own case is less about health authorities than it is about the platforms doing the censoring. I'll grant the health authorities their needed leeway, but not the platforms. But even setting aside the challenges of science, it ends that section of the study with an ominous line " It then opens the next section with this, which pretty much disparages your support for censorship - " It then goes on about more education being a better approach (which is why you sent this link to me I suppose), which is funny because I never said a word against your support for digital literacy effort, just your supposedly stopgap solution of censorship until some vague future time when you're finally satisfied that it's no longer necessary (whenever that may be...). The article doesn't think highly of censorship either. Here's the very first line of the closing paragraph - " Given how completely this article demolishes your position, including with some arguments that even I didn't make (such as that it introduces its own errors and manipulations), I wonder if you even bothered to read it before sending it to me? Given how quick your message was, and that you admitted to getting it from a cursory google search, I suspect not. This is digital literacy? Really?! And I haven't even gone through the proper process of vetting the article for its sources, funding or other biases (notably the article is from just one author). I don't need to. The article itself contradicts you. And you didn't realize that cos you didn't bother reading it. 3) Your third link is a statement released by the govt. calling on Facebook to censor more. Gee, really?! What in The Maven's name were you hoping to show with this? How does this "show" anything? The third question was as follows - " This doesn't do that, doesn't even TRY to do that. It doesn't even address it! So in short, you've yourself shown that 1) the majority of people in the 21 countries covered by your survey don't believe in the various conspiracy theories it asked them about. 2) Censorship has a whole bunch of issues, and apparently isn't thought well of even by the scientist whose article on it you sent me - and this is on something as scientific as Covid, let alone other kinds of conspiracy theories. 3) No proof of the efficacy of censorship was provided, merely a canned govt. statement calling on Facebook to "do more". Bruh, you just played yourself. This is embarrassing. Give up. Last edited by Exile009#1139 on Nov 28, 2021, 9:04:04 PM
|
|
|
Btw, if anyone else wants the links, I'd be happy to forward them on to you.
None of them are particularly long reads, don't worry. And protip - don't bother questioning their findings or credibility. You don't need to. They THEMSELVES undermine his argument, so don't let him switch tracks. |
|
|
You are going to bring this to the bitter end don't you? Ok then
" The conspiracy theory that there is a shadowy entity controlling everything is the reason people refuse to believe in medicine and science. This is even more evident nowadays, because groups of like minded individuals can simply say that both scientists and doctors work for this entity. It is also the most ludicrous one because there is absolutely no way a single group of people controls every country in the world. Your question was "You have to prove incapability among the majority of the population". You cannot get better than this " This happens to be the thing that is most talked about and about which there are the most conspiracies. Also, the REASON Facebook and Youtube had to put the pedal to the metal and start censoring information. But bet you didn't know that either, what a surprise. And I do believe you completely miss the point of this and similar studies - there are no other solutions which can deal with the problem. No immediate ones at least. " This literally says what I've been saying and what I labelled as long-term. There is no other solution. You yourself have none to offer. Do keep in mind that while the study bashes censorship it does NOT focus on misinformation and the damage it causes. It looks at one side of the coin. But no worries, I will provide you with information about that soon enough. Here is a little piece because you probably shouldn't read all of it: " " What more do you want? Some rando asking for more censorship? I already stated which sources I find to be of the highest authority, you cannot go higher authority than this. I not only showed you that censorship, according to the govt, is necessary, the social networks need to do more of it. |
|
" They do? Even though they say exactly what I've been saying? Are you deliberately assuring others to make them not want to check the information themselves? What a sly move |
|
" Which admits you failed to prove it. Your own numbers are against you. Unless you don't know what a majority is... " What are you even arguing here? "Prudence in using the internet"? "Critical attitudes towards information"? Bruh, no one is even arguing about education. This is an argument over censorship. Your own article bashes censorship. You are not being asked to merely show misinformation exists, you are being asked to justify censorship. And you have failed miserably at it. This thread wasn't started cos someone was pissed at their digital literacy class, it was started cos EVERYONE is being subjected to more censorship, despite even your own data showing only a minority of people even believe in conspiracy theories - and so far you have also completely failed to prove, or even address, that censorship even helps. Even your latest paper only talks about Covid misinformation and what level of impact it has - it literally doesn't mention censorship even once in the entire paper! You're presuming censorship, taking it as the default. You don't get that privilege. You were asked to justify censorship. You have failed to do so repeatedly, and done everything possible to avoid it. " Lol, a govt. media statement asking vaguely for more censorship is 'proof'? And you consider yourself a digital literate? I don't want anyone merely asking for more censorship, I want proof that censorship works. Especially the one that YT is implementing, since that's what started this whole thread. You were given 3 explicit questions - 1) You have to prove incapability among the majority of the population (fail). 2) You have to prove censorship protects from said incapability (ignored). 3) You have to prove YT's censorship has produced positive results (ignored). You've addressed one of them - which showed the opposite - and completely ignored the other two. Firstly failing the first point means you don't even have much of a leg to stand on to begin with, as you're pushing to change the internet for everyone in order to fight a minority. Second, you disingenuously did not even try to justify censorship by proving its efficacy, instead just banging on endlessly about misinformation existing. Thirdly you've also disingenuously continued to pretend as if this whole thing is about information despite repeated reminders that even non-factual content is being censored. And fourthly you continue to put your faith in the very corporations that you yourself blame for helping spread misinformation in the first place. You have failed, and now you're just embarrassing yourself. Last edited by Exile009#1139 on Nov 29, 2021, 1:04:52 AM
|
|
" No they don't. That's a bald-faced lie. You have been defending censorship, while none of your articles support that. And it's a strange accusation to make that I'm encouraging people to not check the info themselves when I literally just offered it to them. Nor did I tell them not to check it. Rather I said not to question their findings or the credibility of the institutions. The reason is because I know there is one here who'll latch on to some of the questions especially asked in the first article (the survey) and go on a rant about how they might actually be true (I had a particular forum member here in mind - it's for him that that request was made). I see that as a distraction, and especially I didn't want him to give you an escape route by allowing you to change the subject AGAIN (as if you're not trying to weasel out of this argument enough already) to discussing any of those conspiracy theories. In other words, there is someone here who might dispute whether all of those ideas are conspiracy, and I didn't want that to give you an opening to escape from being cornered as you are currently. Your own articles have caught you out, and I'd like to see the vice stay tight. I'm not here to dispute any of those things as conspiracies or not. Like the falcon, I have a sharp focus - the issue is the justification for censorship, and I simply wished to stay on topic, not allow you to weasel away again. Last edited by Exile009#1139 on Nov 29, 2021, 1:26:17 AM
|
|
" You not being able to understand the subject matter is not my problem. By the same token I could argue with a quantum physicist and in the end say that he failed to prove anything because I couldn't understand a thing. " You are straight up lying here. My data showed that in some countries, including supposedly first world ones, more than half of the population believes in the global conspiracy. Millions of people who have their own pull and cause their own problems. " Good thing there isn't just a single study on the matter now, is it? I will send you one more, the last one because you are arguing from your own position - picking holes at what I say to prove that I am wrong. You haven't done anything constructive during the discussion, I am the one looking and presenting information to you. I am not here to be your teacher. " Another blatant lie. It is not a statement by a government media, it is a statement by a media critical of the government about a government statement. You try to spin this as some journalist's words. It is not " Same to you, my friend. I told you multiple times that you clearly don't have any clue what you are even arguing about. You showed me that you will do everything to prove your point, including lying. |
|
" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVd5jF0mBYY |
|
