really well or America suddenly got a lot more racist the past decade.
The rage algorithm works
- Thread starter snarlcakes
- Start date
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
You nailed it. Also, it seems like racial justice groups went into overdrive after Obama was elected to argue racism was still alive and well in America and it somehow got turned into the notion that things are actually worse now than they were. Bizarre.
Some of that can be chalked up to financial interests of the racial justice workers, some to their personal identification with a cause that needed to continue even if a lot of what they were fighting for was fixed.
It is one of the biggest mysteries of my life, though, how the majority of the left also started believing this demonstrably false nonsense. I guess the rise of social media and these algorithms explain it to a great degree.
Trayvon Martin might have been the one that got the ball rolling. Seemed like every couple months or so thereafter another black man was publicly murdered in one fashion or another, many times by cops under suspicious circumstances. I don't think Obama or Trump being in office had much to do with it.
the ownership class has been pitting the working class against each other since before any of us were born.
and very successfully doing so.
it's not personal. just business.
Exactly. Like that no good McCain. chaneys and mccains. Gross. Big boxing fan. Stake in Budweiser. Coming out so aggressively against UFC. At a time when GREAT families like the Shamrocks were fighting for peanuts bc they couldn’t get venues. Sleeping at the lion’s den. And please remember Ken and Frank aren’t even real brothers. Frank just out of Folsom. My God. The haves and have nots. Hypocrites. Our government….
It wasn’t business. It was personal.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Yeah, the ubiquity of cell phone cameras was definitely a factor. But again, it was emotion and anecdotal incidents that somehow swamped people’s ability to look at data and realize things are objectively, demonstrably better than they were 20, 30, 40 years ago.
33.1% probably isn’t enough to sustain Democratic control of elections. The Dems and the media had to start an advertising campaign to goose the number. It worked.
It could be that the algorithms are just exposing what already existed beneath the surface. The algorithms only give a person what they want. Sadly most people like to be outraged. Makes them feel apart of something I guess.
Anecdotally, I tested the above on myself. About a year ago I stopped posting anything on social media that had to do with politics. I've only posted about family, sports, and other random hobbies and interests for little over a year now. It's pretty amazing the difference. I get zero political spam anymore. Zero crazy click bait news articles. Certain friends that used to always pop up in my feed with political post no longer do. It's pretty amazing actually.
Ignorance is bliss...
This x 100. The numbers show instances of both violent crime and officer involved shootings have dropped over the years but Americans believe both are way higher than they actually are. Why, b/c there's video now which is far more impactful than mere words (think Rodney King too).
I'd say 24 hr news but it had long existed at that point.
I think Obama did. He weigned in pretty heavily on the Trayvon Martin killing (and I don't think he was wrong in doing so) and others really ran with it. So, while he wasn't (perhaps) the instigator, I think Obama being in the oval office had something to do with it.
The media that one takes in and cell phones.
Everything is on Twitter, and now evidently people are leaving Twitter and going over to Threads, which has a reported 100 million people sign up for it since it came online.
Everything is amped to the nines.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I just heard of it on a pod I was listening to.
Owned by Zuckerberg.
Meta's Twitter rival Threads surges to 100 million users faster than ChatGPT
Threads has been setting records for user growth since its launch. Analysts see it as the first serious threat to the Elon Musk-owned Twitter.
Just further separating people out from actually interacting with each other. I will save the lefty bashing that topic opens up, but it is basically people moving from an area where their political opinion was more able to curate messages they didn't agree with to another platform now promising to go back to that model.I just heard of it on a pod I was listening to.
Owned by Zuckerberg.
Meta's Twitter rival Threads surges to 100 million users faster than ChatGPT
Threads has been setting records for user growth since its launch. Analysts see it as the first serious threat to the Elon Musk-owned Twitter.www.reuters.com
Threads is just the promise of a new echo chamber.
That's one of the more pathetic efforts I've seen. Wtf is the difference between "A lot" and "A Great Deal"
What the hell is the nearly invisible white line?
Looks like a 5th grader was asked to put together a graph.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
So it's like Truth Social for liberals?
But with more reach because it is backed by known privacy expert Mark Zuckerberg.
Define "work". I hope it becomes a true public square situation but I've got mounds of reservations.
Here is poll with similar results to the Snarlcakes post with results summarized as follows...
64% now say racism against Black people is widespread in U.S.
Satisfaction with treatment of Black people remains near low point
But on the other hand the same poll reports...
More U.S. adults than in 2020 say civil rights for Black people have improved
64% now say racism against Black people is widespread in U.S.
Satisfaction with treatment of Black people remains near low point
But on the other hand the same poll reports...
More U.S. adults than in 2020 say civil rights for Black people have improved
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Let's me find cute girls and find more pics of them on the internet?
Social media and the ubiquity of cell phones and their cameras are a lot of it.
My thought is it depends on what you call "racist" too. Used to be "racism" was identified as overt discrimination based on race - denial of voting rights is the best example I can think of. The Voting Rights Act supposedly ended that. Bill Moyers, LBJ's press secretary, thinks it did.
Now anything that can be identified as having a disparate impact - which can be most anything - is considered racist. The vote is only part of the equation now. Denial of Affirmative Action is considered racist. Supporting Affirmative Action is considered racist.
Deservedly so? That depends on your perspective. Where does "disparate impact" end? Some here have asked whether reparations would get the "racist" card rendered obsolete.
Last edited:
Does anyone think that racism against blacks has disappeared from American society?
100% should say "no" and it's not unreasonable that a majority thinks it is widespread.
100% should also say that it's not as bad as it used to be.
As to why fewer people used to think it was widespread, maybe they were back then encouraged by the momentum of change that was going on, and are discouraged by the lack of such momentum today.
100% should say "no" and it's not unreasonable that a majority thinks it is widespread.
100% should also say that it's not as bad as it used to be.
As to why fewer people used to think it was widespread, maybe they were back then encouraged by the momentum of change that was going on, and are discouraged by the lack of such momentum today.
No. Not at all. At least I think. It's what the teens and 20 somethings are moving too. Which means in might actually be successful. Truth Social was DOA.
Who do you think I am, Webster?
I think we all generally understand the concept, particularly within the area of negative attitudes /barriers associated with skin pigmentation.
Meh he’s on to the next thing. xAI. While I’m trying to figure out how to get cheap phones I can sell to Africans
Well, yeah, but it worked when he got it and now it doesn't for a lot of people.
He's turned it into another one of his rockets that blows up after take-off.
Nope. But I was hoping to do better than your last paragraph.
Check out post #27 for a guide . . . .
you mean the Wall St marketing message.
and Wall St is controlled by conservatives.. always has been, and always will be.
that said, Wall St's control of the DNC means many Dem candidates are economic conservatives as well now. (you can't get any more economic far right than the Clintons, and Biden has almost always been a dependable vote for Wall St and the big banks).
very few people in the country actually see immigration, woke, transgender, gay rights, abortion, as the major issues in their life.
they see housing affordability, healthcare affordability, food prices, drug prices, the cost of college, the cost of transportation, hourly wages, and govt serving the rich and corporations all day every day while pissing all over the working man, as the big issues in their life.
yet what do we get all day every day on Wall St media, which is now ALL media, is talking head after talking head and panel after panel going on and on about transgenders and woke and abortion and election stealing and immigration and guns.
and almost nothing on economic matters that Wall St does care about, so wants no discussion on.
the Wall St media keep everyone fighting all day every day over social issues Wall St and the big fund managers don't care squat about, to make sure the public and political debates AREN'T over ECONOMIC issues Wall St doesn't want discussed and debated every night on the media, let alone voted on in elections God forbid.
it's not personal. just business.
Similar threads
