I had the misfortune of running into a leftist analysis on Rich Men North of Richmond today. the thing that made me stop watching was when he said
in the next lyric, we can clearly see where this guy gets his news
gets his news
It made me think about my conversations with both leftists and Qtards alike, where they constantly talk about how news source x is unreliable and news source y is the one that tells the truth.
Anyone who is here from GamerGate knows that news sources are unreliable as fuck, as well as being highly prone to lies by omission and otherwise pushing an agenda. this is been true from CNN, to Fox News, to Zero Hedge, to Breitbart, to MSNBC, to any other online blogging rag.
This a world where if someone is simply "getting their news" from somewhere, they do not have the whole truth and are likely in a complete bubble.
One should not be "getting their news", one should be hunting the news and hunting the truth. anything less means you are just believing what someone else wants you to believe.
/rant
With the power of pattern recognition, you will never need the news.
Coming out of the wikileaks era, Gamergate was another one of those weird moments where the curtain of what we thought to be reality was lifted and the devil with a finger then pressed to his blackened lips, said "shhhh~", and pulled it shut. No one else saw. We became bearers of a secret that very few people are aware of yet it is agonizingly within plain sight. The moment you see all of this and its interconnected socio-political/corporate entrails and identifiable historical patterns you can't believe it's actually happening and that they can't possibly just be ignoring all of it! You must show people the truth!
Then you recognize how much explaining you have to do, how short their attention spans are, the tiny timeslice of history they preoccupy mentally, how conditioned they already are, and how they ascertain the social value of even having these opinions... you begin to realize that a lot of their ideas of what is true is basically just a social game - catty political facebook memes elevate their social capital more than anything you have to say.
From then on, it's all pretty much just heavy indifference and crestfallen pattern recognition. Watch your tinfoil hat become a crown of clairvoyance and wisdom whenever you guess everything the news is going to say and everyone's designer opinion reaction verbatim without ever hearing a word of it to everyone's reluctant amazement. Sadly they will still dismiss you.
We don't call 'em "sheep" for nothin'!
Lassie's gone home.
And those of us old enough to remember the Clinton era will look over at you, and ask, "First time?"
My tin foil hat was old enough to vote when GamerGate kicked off.
It hurts.
PRO = Pattern Recognition Observer
Sad but true.
It came to me in a dream
I MADE IT THE FUCK UP!
Racist conspiracy guys are the best source for news and it's not even close.
Good post!
This is kind of tangential and unrelated to your point but I think it’s still kind of relavent:
Reddit was started as a link sharing hub. I’m not even sure they had “self”/text posts when it launched. It was a place to find new places. Same with news aggregators back then, things like RSS feeds, Slashdot, metafilter, StumbleUpon (remember that one?) etc etc were all about broadening your horizions, but at some point (probably when user metrics and daily active hours became the be-all end-all) these sites became closed gardens, the news became (more) insular and only set out to shore up the opinions of people who already agreed with them.
flashbacks to Digg
I miss stumbleupon.
And neither side knows, or can apply the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect.
My brother in law asked me this exact question last year.
I told him mostly Twitter (which is sort of true but I didn't feel like getting into specifics), and he frowned and said something like, "it used to be good for that."
Edit: Then I replied telling him it's just a link sharing site and you can make it as left or right as you want to. But he wasn't having it. The CBC (he's Canadian) told him it's now a racist hellscape and so that's what he believes.
I'm gonna be honest, I hate normies like your brother in law more than the lying media. I do feel bad because they're the ones being victimized, and we're supposed to hate the elites - not let them turn us against each other - but I no longer give people the benefit of the doubt when everyone has a global network of information at their fingertips. I'd rather not have relationships with my own extended family or former friends if it means having to walk on eggshells around unwitting tools of the enemy. If the boogaloo ever goes down I'm not saving them.
If my grandma can listen, ask questions, and learn... I have no sympathy for younger people that can see well enough to find an answer for themselves. She set the bar too high. As far as I'm concerned anyone not even willing to look at both side and think for themselves has been a lost cause for too long to bother with.
if it makes you feel any better I'm in the same boat except more extreme where I've got normies who don't even realise that they're full on leftists. They always deny it but I've grown up in one of those infamous middle class leftist families that are so left wing in the most left wing part of the country they don't know how left wing they are. If they started hanging out with anti-communist Chinese or Cuban-Americans it would probably seem like a different world to them.
They know I'm 'right wing' by their standards I guess when it comes to stuff like freedom of speech but I keep my mouth shut about my more detailed knowledge. Seriously though, how am I supposed to explain that part of my sources of information are often chatting to ex-military types on Gab/Minds and wargaming with other autists about what's going to happen next?
I sort of red pilled but slipped up at the same time when I was talking to the martial arts normies I know explaining to them the whole Wagner Group thing was probably an op and it's made me realise if I kept talking like that they wouldn't think I was just a conspiracy theorist they'd probably think I'd work for the government in some capacity lol so I'm keeping my mouth shut again and they're the more reasonable sort and I explained this is why I don't talk much. They don't realise how much information is available online if you know where you look. It's not as if I'm amazingly skilled or anything either, half the time I just rant about shit and people approach me to have a chat because I'm going in autistic levels of detail about it all.
Yeah I only see him once or twice a year so it's easy to keep things surface level, but he and my sister are the definition of useful idiots.
"Where do you get your news?" = "Are you using an approved access point for NPC updates?"
I do feel your pain on this one, in fact something people can do to understand this agony. I reckon you can pick just about any topic even if you know the articles being written are pure bullshit the NPCs and normies are inevitably going to be having their opinions lifted straight from a news article on the first page of google or on wikipedia.
They don't do their own research on anything anymore. No contacts with experts, not even bothering to look past a few pages in the search engine and check out sources they disagree with. I make it something of a challenge to myself to read even crap from redditors so I understand why they get the opinions that they do on stuff and you realise this is exactly how they behave as well when talking amongst themselves.
Journalists don't really do any of their own research either, most of the news now is just people talking about something posted on social media and it's crap. They're all being spoon fed what the elites want them to believe. Depending on how NPC the people you're talking to are they'll probably even quote specific statistics thinking they're smart and then when you poke around at the stat itself you realise it's a load of shit.
The scariest thing about that is government, the business world, and military don't either. Certain highly positioned people of wealth and power still know they have to do their own information collection. Trump and Elon Musk are two famous examples of people known to have private investigators on call. (Elon infamously used his own shady family member at one point, with hilarious results) Investors will personally investigate companies they are dealing with, or have analysts for that. But the vast majority of government officials, judges, college professors, military officers, corporate executives - almost anyone running any part of "The Establishment" - read the news from Mockingbird media - fed by the intelligence agencies - or from PR/marketing agencies run by woke liberal arts graduates. Congress members get the People's Daily delivered on a regular basis. Even heads of state that may care about their nation's people are getting their information from intelligence agencies (CIA/MI5->Five Eyes) that are run by insane ideologues feeding their clients constant bullshit to protect their own operations. Most news agencies themselves simply copy from some other news agency.
The entire world is being run into the ground on a self-feeding circle of inaccuracy, bullshit, woke cultism, and incompetence. What goes for "news" these days is so bad I bet even the globalist elites - people who are more likely to use private surveillance than others - are less competent than they would be otherwise.
I pictured a scene of several cavemen hunting a woolly mammoth.
that's how it should be done.
logically, you are not "getting your news" from those sources if you question them at all. You are simply interpreting one information source.
That's what proper researchers do and then they correlate that information to see what's accurate and what's not because there will be different perspectives from the journalists that wrote them if they did actual research themselves. More often than not though, you find it's a half-arsed copy and paste job these days and if you've read one article you've read them all which is why we need to go to alt-tech and chat to people online working in industries or who are local to the area to get our news. This is why AI is going to be taking over these jobs, it's not that AI is advanced enough to replace humans. It's because they know they don't need humans to do any of it anymore.
Have you noticed? It's less about getting news from a centralised source these days, we're doing the equivalent of going to the local bazaar and finding out rumours but on a global scale which is what the internet has enabled us to do. That's why our information is often way better than even government agencies. Whenever you've seen a breaking story that's accurate or whatever it's usually some local person who's recording it or it's been a tip off from an industry professional.
To say you aren't "getting your news" from a source because you think about their track record is like saying you didn't hear about Bob gettig married because Bob was the one who told you and he's a known liar.
It's just former Daily Show listeners doing a radicalized, 20 years later version of "lol faux news". No point in engaging with anybody who starts that line on the dialogue tree.
Mostly from people or sites that would mercilessly mock you if you told them they were "news."
I only have one "news" source in my daily travels: OANN. I check that once or twice a day to make sure nothing blew up or burned down while I was off doing something else. Other than that, forums, blogs, and social media, places where I evaluate everything against historical track record of accuracy.
look at the wikipedia list of "reliable sources". they include far left organizations like SPLC and ADL which have literally paid out millions of dollars for defamation, meaning a court of law said they made extremely false, extremely damaging statements about others.
yet these people view these faggots as "reliable".
it has nothing to do with facts or truth, and everything to do with political propaganda.
Spent a lot of time doing humanities research (lit and philosophy) at university. Most important thing you learn from this process is exactly how disconnected from reality "popular" sources are. And of course in the scholarly sources there is a spectrum of respectability and reliability across fields as well as publishers (journals, books, etc). The best you can hope for, in the best fields, by the best authors, via the best publishers, etc. is 90%-85% trust for a period of time.... It has to be continually re-earned. The public in general, and young students particularly, simply have no clue.
It's trying to get people off topic.
You get some from my posts.
I heard it through the grapevine.