Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

alixkunšŸŸ£šŸŽ©šŸ” pfp
alixkunšŸŸ£šŸŽ©šŸ”
@alixkun
I feel like this is the right channel to have this discussion. @mazmhussain do you think we'll be able to find a solution to the "post-truth" situation we're in? I thought about it when I saw your cast about the meme with the UFOs, saying that ppl didn't even care when NSA confirmed UFOs are real, because they're bombarded with information. I feel like the problem is not so much the "volume" than the "quality". We went from a state where "I saw it on TV= it's true" to "I don't trust anything I see/hear by default". Related to that, we seem to have internalized the fact that objectivity/neutrality doesn't exist, there's only partisan opinions. Even if there's some truth to it, I feel like it's a slippery slope, because it tends to put in the same bag journalists who, while having opinions, aim at neutrality, and journalist who don't care at all and go for full bias. It's a small nuance, but a very important one imo. Happy to hear ppl's thoughts on this, and be pointed to thinkers who went over this matter.
4 replies
7 recasts
43 reactions

Moon pfp
Moon
@moon.eth
UFOs arenā€™t real, the information presented was easily debunked, whatā€™s more concerning is why the US government all of a sudden wanted people to think they think UFOs are real. We have this massive thing that just runs psyops on its own population all the time and we all just kind of accept it does this.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction

Harpocryptes pfp
Harpocryptes
@harpocryptes
Was it really "the US government" who wanted this to be a topic, or a few people (possible manipulating others)?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

Moon pfp
Moon
@moon.eth
The government is big and has many actors but when itā€™s the army putting out press releases being backed by the White House you can plausibly attribute it to the main entity. There was some bigger policy purpose.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction