Friam

Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Classic

List

Threaded

14 messages Options

Jochen Fromm-5

Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html

The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.

How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

-J.

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

gepr

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)

To: FriAM <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

gepr

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5

I disagree somewhat. I think propaganda is closely related to fake news. And the disruption scheme the Russians use involves fake news about all candidates (e.g. Trump donating his plane to help people). The propaganda *also* "treats both sides". My suggestion is that propaganda is distinguishable from conspiracy theory through the inclusion of *detail*. Propaganda seems a bit light on detail, whereas conspiracy theories are detail rich. Both are false.

The tricky distinction is between conspiracy theory and credible detail-wading. Rachel Maddow is a good foil for that distinction. Sometimes she looks like a dork just doing a good job. And sometimes she looks like a wacko spouting (very detailed) conspiracy theories ... still a dork, of course, which is why I love her.

On 6/5/20 8:10 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions.

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Important aspect too. In what sense was the op ed from Tom Cotton fake or false in your opinion ?

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/5/20 17:19 (GMT+01:00)

To: FriAM <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

gepr

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by Jochen Fromm-5

I think the important falsehood for me relates to the ascriptions to antifa. From the Guardian article I linked: "Cotton’s op-ed also contained the claim that Antifa had “infiltrated marches”, which has been debunked by Times journalists."

On 6/5/20 8:38 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> Important aspect too. In what sense was the op ed from Tom Cotton fake or false in your opinion ?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

uǝʃƃ ⊥ glen

thompnickson2

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by gepr

Well, for starters, it’s inaccurate in his characterization of his enemies, no?

On the contrary, nihilist criminals are simply out for loot and the thrill of destruction, with cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa infiltrating protest marches to exploit Floyd’s death for their own anarchic purposes.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 9:38 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Important aspect too. In what sense was the op ed from Tom Cotton fake or false in your opinion ?

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/5/20 17:19 (GMT+01:00)

To: FriAM <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Gary Schiltz-4

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by gepr

Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. I spent 50 of my 61 years in the USA, where it is almost a national religion. It is certainly baked into our psyche. It is nonetheless tempered by a variety of laws, most of which appeal to Americans' common sense (whether or not we do indeed have much common sense is debatable, though my biased view is that we do). The quintessential example given as a limit to freedom of speech is yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, causing people to stampede with resultant injury or death. US law also penalizes libel (written damage to someone's reputation through false statements) and slander (verbal version of libel). We also have laws against false advertising.

The interesting thing to me is in the differences by country in the interpretation/enforcement of these laws and the attitudes of the people toward freedom of speech (I suppose laws feedback to attitudes and vice versa). Being nearly a national religion, we Americans feel we have the right to say basically whatever we want about anything (I suppose we feel speech is simply aural/written expression of our opinions, which we love to express, loudly). Paradoxically, we are pretty thin-skinned, and easily take offense when we are on the receiving end of such tirades. Our attitudes towards governance in general (mostly against) is also baked into our psyche.

In Ecuador, slander and libel are taken much more seriously than in the USA, both in the culture and the laws. Consequently, people are much more reticent about complaining publicly about something. Social media is changing this a lot, making it much more common to call politicians corrupt (maybe the consequence of having their rights to political dissent squashed for a decade under Rafael Correa, now ex-president and indicted criminal on the run). But libel (or whatever it is called when it applies to writing about a business) is still quite easily prosecuted. I've heard of many cases where someone is charged and convicted for simply writing publicly (i.e. on social media) about a bad experience they had with a business.

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Jochen Fromm-5

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Here in Germany we had no freedom of speech during Nazism 1933-1945 and during Soviet Communism 1961-1989 in the East. If you dared to criticize the wrong persons or parties at that time officers from the secret state police would came at night, do some enhanced interrogation and put you in a concentration camp. In Nazi Germany that was the Gestapo in combination with the Stormtroopers from the SS, in the GDR during Communism where Putin was a KGB officer the Stasi (state security) would come and imprison you. Typical for both systems, communism and Nazism, was ubiquitous propaganda for the single-party state and its infallible leaders.

Today the constitution guarantees free speech unless you insult someone. Slander is an indictable offense here too. Propaganda has not completely vanished, just diversified as various forms of PR, marketing and advertising in my opinion. Opinions can turn into propaganda if they become one-sided praise for the state and supreme leader. I think that is what the NY Times is trying to avoid by presenting multiple opinions.

There are of course extreme opinions that lead to demagoguery and fascism, like the opinion that protesters damage law and order although they are doing the opposite (chapter 7 in "How fascism works" from Jason Stanley). That could be the trap in which the NY Times has stumbled here.

-J.

-------- Original message --------

From: Gary Schiltz <[hidden email]>

Date: 6/5/20 18:20 (GMT+01:00)

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Gary Schiltz-4

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by Gary Schiltz-4

Jochen, thanks for the perspective of Germany. I get the feeling that we Americans rather abuse the concept of free speech. No action is without effect, including speech, so my opinion is that people should be responsible for not just actions, but for what they say and write. If I express views that I believe other "reasonable" people view as extreme, I like to acknowledge that my view is at odds with others, but then go on to express it. This is because of a desire to myself to be a reasonable person, rather than fear of legal consequences. I get the feeling that, at least in Western democracies like Germany, people generally act in a more mature fashion. We yanks tend to take less responsibility for what we say and do. There is at least some justification for the term "Ugly American".

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 2:07 PM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

Here in Germany we had no freedom of speech during Nazism 1933-1945 and during Soviet Communism 1961-1989 in the East. If you dared to criticize the wrong persons or parties at that time officers from the secret state police would came at night, do some enhanced interrogation and put you in a concentration camp. In Nazi Germany that was the Gestapo in combination with the Stormtroopers from the SS, in the GDR during Communism where Putin was a KGB officer the Stasi (state security) would come and imprison you. Typical for both systems, communism and Nazism, was ubiquitous propaganda for the single-party state and its infallible leaders.

Today the constitution guarantees free speech unless you insult someone. Slander is an indictable offense here too. Propaganda has not completely vanished, just diversified as various forms of PR, marketing and advertising in my opinion. Opinions can turn into propaganda if they become one-sided praise for the state and supreme leader. I think that is what the NY Times is trying to avoid by presenting multiple opinions.

There are of course extreme opinions that lead to demagoguery and fascism, like the opinion that protesters damage law and order although they are doing the opposite (chapter 7 in "How fascism works" from Jason Stanley). That could be the trap in which the NY Times has stumbled here.

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: Gary Schiltz <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 18:20 (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. I spent 50 of my 61 years in the USA, where it is almost a national religion. It is certainly baked into our psyche. It is nonetheless tempered by a variety of laws, most of which appeal to Americans' common sense (whether or not we do indeed have much common sense is debatable, though my biased view is that we do). The quintessential example given as a limit to freedom of speech is yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, causing people to stampede with resultant injury or death. US law also penalizes libel (written damage to someone's reputation through false statements) and slander (verbal version of libel). We also have laws against false advertising.

The interesting thing to me is in the differences by country in the interpretation/enforcement of these laws and the attitudes of the people toward freedom of speech (I suppose laws feedback to attitudes and vice versa). Being nearly a national religion, we Americans feel we have the right to say basically whatever we want about anything (I suppose we feel speech is simply aural/written expression of our opinions, which we love to express, loudly). Paradoxically, we are pretty thin-skinned, and easily take offense when we are on the receiving end of such tirades. Our attitudes towards governance in general (mostly against) is also baked into our psyche.

In Ecuador, slander and libel are taken much more seriously than in the USA, both in the culture and the laws. Consequently, people are much more reticent about complaining publicly about something. Social media is changing this a lot, making it much more common to call politicians corrupt (maybe the consequence of having their rights to political dissent squashed for a decade under Rafael Correa, now ex-president and indicted criminal on the run). But libel (or whatever it is called when it applies to writing about a business) is still quite easily prosecuted. I've heard of many cases where someone is charged and convicted for simply writing publicly (i.e. on social media) about a bad experience they had with a business.

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Steve Smith

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by gepr

all-

---I composed most of this BEFORE I joined FriAM this morning but reflects the questions I directed to Tom---

GEPR> I disagree somewhat. I think propaganda is closely related to fake news.

I personally feel bamboozled by the question of media bias and how it convolves with my own personal bias(es) and/or convolves with the bias of my various communities which I am embedded-in/informed-by. I really appreciate that some have made the effort to map the major media sources out like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_Fontes_Media#Media_Bias_Chart

I'm sure I've seen others... but on minor inspection, this seems like a "go to" for a lot of people.

I think there are more than 2 dimensions (quality vs left/right). While I lean/list left, I have some sympathies toward what is normally considered "Right".

While this is roughly 2D, I see that the vertical dimension has an inflection point just below CNN and right through the middle of FOX... there is an abrupt qualitative difference at that point IMO.

This also treats each news source as a point source whilst they are more of a distribution. Some reporters/editors/opinioners will fall within a spectrum around that point. Mike Wallace vs Sean Hannity vs Judge Jeanine or Joe Scarborough vs Rachel Maddow vs Brian Williams.

I read the Wikipedia Article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias ) and appreciate the high-level view and introduction of multiple dimensions but it felt somewhat incomplete as a summary?

I should probably revisit Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" which sits on my shelf but mostly serves me as the source of an easy/trivial cliche.

I am a modest fan of Public Radio/TV to which I tend to think of BBC and Al Jazeera as members of, though I'm not sure why for AJ, maybe because like NPR/PBS and BBC it is State Funded (Qatr). Why do these seem "fair and balanced" when the trope of "State controlled media" seems just the opposite?

How do serious skeptics and/or journalists make these judgements? A well-trained associative memory across sources, journalists, era, ???

And the disruption scheme the Russians use involves fake news about all candidates (e.g. Trump donating his plane to help people). The propaganda *also* "treats both sides". My suggestion is that propaganda is distinguishable from conspiracy theory through the inclusion of *detail*. Propaganda seems a bit light on detail, whereas conspiracy theories are detail rich. Both are false.

I think it is also worth adding "intentions matter" to "words matter". Some Conspiracy Theory IS propaganda, or at least crystalizes around propaganda and is groomed by propaganda machines. Many participants in conspiracy dissemination are likely unaware that they are part of (or responding to) a propaganda campaign. I think this is what distinguishes "willful ignorance" (blind to the propaganda one is participating in through willfulness) and "ignorant willfulness" (having an axe to grind and being unwilling to look at anything that might undermine that axe-grinding)?

- Steve


The tricky distinction is between conspiracy theory and credible detail-wading. Rachel Maddow is a good foil for that distinction. Sometimes she looks like a dork just doing a good job. And sometimes she looks like a wacko spouting (very detailed) conspiracy theories ... still a dork, of course, which is why I love her.

On 6/5/20 8:10 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:

When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions.

thompnickson2

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

In reply to this post by Gary Schiltz-4

Gary,

Ever since I hitchhiked around France as kid I have had an article lurking in my craw about your subject, variations in conceptions of freedom across the “western” world. The idea of giving my passport into my hotel when I checked in inorder that the police could come look it over in the night sounded really bizarre to me but was as routine to the French as bidets. The title of the article is, Degrees of Freedom I don’t think I am ever going to write the article, so you can have the title. It still needs writing.

Do you know the idea of “contrast classes”? (I hope I have that right). It is the idea that our notion of X is shaped as much by our understanding of not-x as it is by our understanding of X. So, for instance, the collapse of American democracy in the last 30 years can be attributed, in part, to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90’s, because they were the authoritarian Not-X to our X. Also, the kleptocracy of modern Russia is the Not-X to the collectivist, centralized X of the Soviet economy. Finally, Jill LePore, in These Truths, argues that the highly aggressive American notion of freedom was the Not-X to our prolongation of slavery. We understood what liberty was precisely because we had daily acquaintance with its opposite.

So, in your soon-to-be published exploration of the variations in the conception of freedom please give a shout to contrast classes.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 10:19 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:

oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Gary Schiltz-4

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Thanks for the title and ideas, but I humbly decline the offer. I'm unfortunately too much of an "idea skimmer", only going an inch deep into many deep subjects. That's probably my way of saying I'm too lazy to delve too deeply into it :-)

On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 2:50 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Gary,

Ever since I hitchhiked around France as kid I have had an article lurking in my craw about your subject, variations in conceptions of freedom across the “western” world. The idea of giving my passport into my hotel when I checked in inorder that the police could come look it over in the night sounded really bizarre to me but was as routine to the French as bidets. The title of the article is, Degrees of Freedom I don’t think I am ever going to write the article, so you can have the title. It still needs writing.

Do you know the idea of “contrast classes”? (I hope I have that right). It is the idea that our notion of X is shaped as much by our understanding of not-x as it is by our understanding of X. So, for instance, the collapse of American democracy in the last 30 years can be attributed, in part, to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90’s, because they were the authoritarian Not-X to our X. Also, the kleptocracy of modern Russia is the Not-X to the collectivist, centralized X of the Soviet economy. Finally, Jill LePore, in These Truths, argues that the highly aggressive American notion of freedom was the Not-X to our prolongation of slavery. We understood what liberty was precisely because we had daily acquaintance with its opposite.

So, in your soon-to-be published exploration of the variations in the conception of freedom please give a shout to contrast classes.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 10:19 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. I spent 50 of my 61 years in the USA, where it is almost a national religion. It is certainly baked into our psyche. It is nonetheless tempered by a variety of laws, most of which appeal to Americans' common sense (whether or not we do indeed have much common sense is debatable, though my biased view is that we do). The quintessential example given as a limit to freedom of speech is yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, causing people to stampede with resultant injury or death. US law also penalizes libel (written damage to someone's reputation through false statements) and slander (verbal version of libel). We also have laws against false advertising.

The interesting thing to me is in the differences by country in the interpretation/enforcement of these laws and the attitudes of the people toward freedom of speech (I suppose laws feedback to attitudes and vice versa). Being nearly a national religion, we Americans feel we have the right to say basically whatever we want about anything (I suppose we feel speech is simply aural/written expression of our opinions, which we love to express, loudly). Paradoxically, we are pretty thin-skinned, and easily take offense when we are on the receiving end of such tirades. Our attitudes towards governance in general (mostly against) is also baked into our psyche.

In Ecuador, slander and libel are taken much more seriously than in the USA, both in the culture and the laws. Consequently, people are much more reticent about complaining publicly about something. Social media is changing this a lot, making it much more common to call politicians corrupt (maybe the consequence of having their rights to political dissent squashed for a decade under Rafael Correa, now ex-president and indicted criminal on the run). But libel (or whatever it is called when it applies to writing about a business) is still quite easily prosecuted. I've heard of many cases where someone is charged and convicted for simply writing publicly (i.e. on social media) about a bad experience they had with a business.

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

thompnickson2

Re: Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

I don’t believe in the existence of laziness. Laziness is just the not-X to the X that you are doing.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

Clark University

[hidden email]

https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 11:36 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 2:50 PM <[hidden email]> wrote:

Gary,

Ever since I hitchhiked around France as kid I have had an article lurking in my craw about your subject, variations in conceptions of freedom across the “western” world. The idea of giving my passport into my hotel when I checked in inorder that the police could come look it over in the night sounded really bizarre to me but was as routine to the French as bidets. The title of the article is, Degrees of Freedom I don’t think I am ever going to write the article, so you can have the title. It still needs writing.

Do you know the idea of “contrast classes”? (I hope I have that right). It is the idea that our notion of X is shaped as much by our understanding of not-x as it is by our understanding of X. So, for instance, the collapse of American democracy in the last 30 years can be attributed, in part, to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90’s, because they were the authoritarian Not-X to our X. Also, the kleptocracy of modern Russia is the Not-X to the collectivist, centralized X of the Soviet economy. Finally, Jill LePore, in These Truths, argues that the highly aggressive American notion of freedom was the Not-X to our prolongation of slavery. We understood what liberty was precisely because we had daily acquaintance with its opposite.

So, in your soon-to-be published exploration of the variations in the conception of freedom please give a shout to contrast classes.

Nick

Nicholas Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
Clark University
[hidden email]
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Gary Schiltz
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 10:19 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

Freedom of speech is a tricky thing. I spent 50 of my 61 years in the USA, where it is almost a national religion. It is certainly baked into our psyche. It is nonetheless tempered by a variety of laws, most of which appeal to Americans' common sense (whether or not we do indeed have much common sense is debatable, though my biased view is that we do). The quintessential example given as a limit to freedom of speech is yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, causing people to stampede with resultant injury or death. US law also penalizes libel (written damage to someone's reputation through false statements) and slander (verbal version of libel). We also have laws against false advertising.

The interesting thing to me is in the differences by country in the interpretation/enforcement of these laws and the attitudes of the people toward freedom of speech (I suppose laws feedback to attitudes and vice versa). Being nearly a national religion, we Americans feel we have the right to say basically whatever we want about anything (I suppose we feel speech is simply aural/written expression of our opinions, which we love to express, loudly). Paradoxically, we are pretty thin-skinned, and easily take offense when we are on the receiving end of such tirades. Our attitudes towards governance in general (mostly against) is also baked into our psyche.

In Ecuador, slander and libel are taken much more seriously than in the USA, both in the culture and the laws. Consequently, people are much more reticent about complaining publicly about something. Social media is changing this a lot, making it much more common to call politicians corrupt (maybe the consequence of having their rights to political dissent squashed for a decade under Rafael Correa, now ex-president and indicted criminal on the run). But libel (or whatever it is called when it applies to writing about a business) is still quite easily prosecuted. I've heard of many cases where someone is charged and convicted for simply writing publicly (i.e. on social media) about a bad experience they had with a business.

What insights do other folks on the list from different countries besides the USA and Ecuador have?

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:10 AM Jochen Fromm <[hidden email]> wrote:
oh sorry, I overlooked your post. When does an opinion become propaganda? I think this happens when you repeat one-sided opinions. In this sense the NY Times tried to do the right thing, but failed nevertheless :-/

-J.

-------- Original message --------
From: uǝlƃ ☣ <[hidden email]>
Date: 6/5/20 16:15 (GMT+01:00)
To: FriAM <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Freedom of opinion or fascist trap

New York Times says senator Tom Cotton's op-ed did not meet editorial standards
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/05/new-york-times-says-tom-cotton-opinion-piece-did-not-meet-editorial-standards

As I tried to say in my previous post: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/credibility-tp7596748.html
The NYT has lost its Op-Ed credibility. For me, Bret Stephens was the trigger. I'd already been miffed that I couldn't simply suspend my subscription for a little while. You have to call them on the phone, which is irritating for someone who doesn't like talking on the phone. So, hiring Stephens was the 2nd justification. And I've considered re-subscribing since their GitHub covid19 data came online. But then the Cotton Op-Ed changed my mind. With their backtracking and now admitting the Cotton Op-Ed was a mistake, I'm more likely to resub before the elections. Their election tools are great.

But their credibility has taken a huge hit, however you cut it.

On 6/5/20 4:32 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The NY Times op ed from Tom Cotton named "Send in the troops" has caused a bit of a controversy, even inside the NY Times
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html
>
> The NY Times is trying to represent the whole spectrum of politically significant opinions. If they only print opinions that fit to one worldview they are making propaganda. If they publish all kinds of opinions, they may support fascism, authoritarianism or racism.
>
> How do you solve this dilemma? Did they fall into a trap now because they have supported the rise of fascism by printing this opinion, as Jason Stanley, the author of "How fascism works" says?

--
☣ uǝlƃ

- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . ...- --- .-.. ..- - .. --- -. -..-. .-- .. .-.. .-.. -..-. -... . -..-. .-.. .. ...- . -..-. ... - .-. . .- -- . -..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/