Climate lies explained in 1 chart
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (57)
sorted by:
You already recognized the image as a meme, so why are you trying to analyze it as a non-meme? The point is to convey a package of ideas. Here, all I'm really seeing is "climate change alarmism is illogical" and "talking heads are untrustworthy", chained together by what I think is common knowledge "talking heads supply most climate change alarmism". If I was skimming data for affirmations, that's what I'd get from this.
At least, I think this is the type of meme where it's designed for an audience to just spend under a minute thinking about (for a quick affirmation). Actually reading that text on the bottom (light gray on white so it's harder to notice), let alone typing out the source link (split across two lines so it's annoying), these aren't really expected to occur. An informational meme that's made with the intent of being thoroughly examined would be visually designed to encourage it.
When it provides me a source and someone says "Climate lies explained in 1 chart" which is complete rubbish, it gets a critique.
It's a bad meme. Hell, the petition link someone sent isn't a meme, but at least it's better. This is just unrelated nonsense.
Well, I'll agree it's a bad meme, at least. I would really prefer there be another term other than "meme" for this sort of thing, because I'm still operating off an older definition that involves a degree of humor and/or wit. Semantic gripe, I guess.
I'm okay with calling it a "low effort post" or "shitpost".
A good shitpost is like a work of art. ...Hmm, going off of Urban Dictionary, I guess I can go with "bad shitpost". It is meant to evoke an unproductive response, and is designed with poor tact.
Only problem is that I automatically think of text when I hear "shitpost", rather than images.