There’s no reasonable way for a single person to point out every single flaw in a conspiratorial website. The whole article is a gish-gallop; so much misinformation that even if I disproved 90% of the primary points, people would still latch on to the 10% that I hadn’t had time to disprove, and say, see?, they were right! (That’s assuming that they even accept counterclaims as being sufficient in the first place.)
Paying attention to your sources and not using bad ones is one of the first, most basic principles of media literacy. Failing to adhere to this basic principle is precisely how you get Q-anon.
How about disprove just one thing? Can you handle that?
Wild that you’re attempting to speak with authority, when you’re the one being most vague and refusing to provide an ounce of material to support your argument.
I don’t have to. It’s a shitty source that’s making extraordinary claims, so it’s on them to provide the extraordinary proof.
I could make any number of bullshit claims, like, say, Nazis built a moon base shortly before the end of WWII, and the inability of the allies to find Hitler’s body proves that he didn’t commit suicide in a bunker in Berlin, and you would quite rightly insist that I give you a lot of solid evidence. The article does none of that.
The fact that someone has worked for the gov’t in the past does not prove in any way, shape, or form, that a particular company is controlled by the gov’t. My ex-spouse used to work for the US State Dept, and now is an accountant at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd; does that mean that Deloitte is a US gov’t asset? I have an uncle that was in the diplomatic corps, and now owns his own business; is his business directly controlled by the US gov’t too?
Roughly 3M people are directly employed by the US fed. gov’t at any given time, in a national of roughly 345M people. So no, it’s not that unexpected that someone with high level management experience would also end up working as a high-level manager at corporation after they left gov’t service. (And why would someone leave the gov’t? Because when you compare pay rates for comparable levels of responsibility, the gov’t always comes out far behind.)
You lack a basic understanding of how the revolving door works to progress digital censorship. And we’re not talking about just any government position- these are spooks.
When you can’t disprove the content, attack the source.
There’s no reasonable way for a single person to point out every single flaw in a conspiratorial website. The whole article is a gish-gallop; so much misinformation that even if I disproved 90% of the primary points, people would still latch on to the 10% that I hadn’t had time to disprove, and say, see?, they were right! (That’s assuming that they even accept counterclaims as being sufficient in the first place.)
Paying attention to your sources and not using bad ones is one of the first, most basic principles of media literacy. Failing to adhere to this basic principle is precisely how you get Q-anon.
How about disprove just one thing? Can you handle that?
Wild that you’re attempting to speak with authority, when you’re the one being most vague and refusing to provide an ounce of material to support your argument.
I don’t have to. It’s a shitty source that’s making extraordinary claims, so it’s on them to provide the extraordinary proof.
I could make any number of bullshit claims, like, say, Nazis built a moon base shortly before the end of WWII, and the inability of the allies to find Hitler’s body proves that he didn’t commit suicide in a bunker in Berlin, and you would quite rightly insist that I give you a lot of solid evidence. The article does none of that.
Did you actually read it? There’s links throughout.
How is them pointing out the work history of the government staff installed on this an “extraordinary claim”?
::sigh::
The fact that someone has worked for the gov’t in the past does not prove in any way, shape, or form, that a particular company is controlled by the gov’t. My ex-spouse used to work for the US State Dept, and now is an accountant at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd; does that mean that Deloitte is a US gov’t asset? I have an uncle that was in the diplomatic corps, and now owns his own business; is his business directly controlled by the US gov’t too?
Roughly 3M people are directly employed by the US fed. gov’t at any given time, in a national of roughly 345M people. So no, it’s not that unexpected that someone with high level management experience would also end up working as a high-level manager at corporation after they left gov’t service. (And why would someone leave the gov’t? Because when you compare pay rates for comparable levels of responsibility, the gov’t always comes out far behind.)
This is basic media literacy stuff.
You lack a basic understanding of how the revolving door works to progress digital censorship. And we’re not talking about just any government position- these are spooks.
…Right. And your evidence in these cases, aside from allegations is…?