Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.
Propaganda isn’t always fake news, it can also be true stuff presented in a biased way.
Similarly, fake news isn’t always propaganda. Some is just stuff spread by trolls to make fun of people.
Propaganda isn’t always fake news, it can also be true stuff presented in a biased way.
It can also be true stuff presented in an unbiased way. There's a disconnect here between the proper definition of the word, which is perfectly neutral, and its connotations because the what secretary for tsunami safety doesn't call their stuff "propaganda" but "public service announcement". Still the same thing, though, the tsunami safety secretary is trying to persuade the audience to not be stupid and get to high ground as soon as the sea recedes. Very much pushing an agenda, they *gasp* want people to survive and *gasp* use communication to achieve it.
Can it? I searched a bit and all the definitions I’ve found seem to be about swaying public opinion, not simple objective announcements.
It does have a negative connotation even though it can be used for good, but I still don’t think purely objective messages like “a tsunami is coming, get to high ground” should count as propaganda.
Which btw yes certainly has editorialising going on. The answer to "Useless projects are funded with EU money" starts with "National and regional authorities in the EU countries select projects which they think meet their needs best in line with the strategies and priorities agreed with the Commission." Which isn't saying that EU money doesn't found useless projects, but implicitly blames regional authorities for it. I don't even think they want to mislead, here, they simply want to stay diplomatic.
(This video about the canopy walk is brilliant. (enable subtitles)).
Corruption, that's why. Similar to how the Italian mafia would half-build highway bridges with taxpayer money and then mysteriously have some shell company go bankrupt. OLAF is on it because of course they are when stuff makes the press. If they have a case EPPO will take over at which point that Hungarian mayor will have the questionable honour of being up against the gal who cleaned up Romania... before Hungarian courts. If those turn out to be corrupt then that's going to buy the mayor time but ultimately the ECJ would overrule them. Still no mechanism to actually set boots on member state grounds but Hungary is already on thin ice when it comes to getting suspended from the EU for various reasons, they're going to tread lightly.
See if you want to be corrupt in the EU you have to do it like the big boys: Implement some policy, then get a cushy job at a company. Or receive tons of money for boring private speeches. Something like that, directly grabbing into state coffers is so uncivilised.
EDIT: Oh, Hungary didn't join EPPO, figures. They can still freeze assets, though. Also if I understand things correctly our mayor would turn into a fugitive in the rest of the EU.
It's also lazy and they're used to not getting investigated or even called out. But even if prosecution is high and you're not lazy you get corrupt politicians doing blatantly obvious stuff like the mask scandal in Germany, making a fortune of selling FFP2 masks at ludicrous markups to the state: Their behaviour was not technically illegal (laws got adjusted since then), the only one who got prosecuted got prosecuted for tax evasion, not corruption.
Platforms like Facebook have an incredible hold on some people. I remember a few years ago when the "Momo" hoax happened, an older coworker arrived at the office and started warning us about the danger of "Momo" they'd seen on Facebook. I'd already heard about the hoax (and was aware of the original creepyasta origins), and brought up a few news articles explaining it, including an official statement from the police. Everyone seemed satisfied by the truth, except for the Facebook addict. They just gave me a blank stare, and a few hours later I heard them telling another group of colleagues to beware of "Momo" getting to their children.
I have family members and longstanding family friends who have succumbed to this. Interestingly almost all of them were decrying the internet as something that couldn't be trusted before the age of social media.
I want to quit Facebook so badly, but I NEED to use WhatsApp. Family, friends, work even. All informal and semi-formal chats go through WhatsApp where I live.
I hate Facebook. Marketplace is unfortunately the only place a lot of stuff is listed, even though it also sucks. I said I wanted stuff within 85 miles, why are you showing me stuff that's 400 miles away??? Craigslist is genuinely a better experience (via the mobile app) these days, but no one uses it.
I haven't viewed the actual Facebook app/feed in probably 7 or 8 years, but I have a Facebook for messenger. There are just too many people that rely on it as a sole form of communication, I was just getting left out of shit.
I don't really see the problem though, do you not have the self control not to browse?
Social media in general is full of people that want to rage or exert control over someone else. I had two of my comments here on Lemmy (not sure what server) under the News community for "Victim Blaming" and "Victim Shaming" for saying that people need to take responsibility for their actions occasionally instead of constantly blaming it on the other party.
I'm convinced those who want to be fearful of things will immediately latch onto a new source of misinformation.
This isn't to say Facebook is good, or that we shouldn't try to have stronger punishment for misinformation that leads to public harm, just that "people are dumb, panicky dangerous animals"
I just 'deactivate' people that share news on facebook. I use FB to give my family (who don't live near me) and friends a small slice of what's going on in my world. I don't post daily/weekly but I only post stuff I create. I also use it for groups/market place since most forums went to FB groups.
I expect the same from my connections, and unfollow anyone that just forwards things (news, memes, other posts). This little bit of management has made my FB feed 'ok'
I disabled my account four years ago when I realized how much plague stupidity and election stupidity on there was harming my mental health.
I doubt I will ever formally delete my account, as it’s the only source for pictures of some now-deceased family members. If hell freezes over and there’s a legit unavoidable need for me to be on there, I’m using desktop+web browser only, and probably in a browser that only gets used for the monthly visit to FB.
Can't you download those pictures locally? It would be good practice anyway to not rely on Facebook of all places to host your beloved photos indefinitely
Be careful, I logged out for too long and forgot my password and they wanted a copy of my driver's license before letting me have access to my account.
How do you decide which sources are credible? I can't decide. Literally everything can be faked, and the more there is on the line, the more incentive and resources there are to do so.
What important stuff do you think there is that isn't faked? How do you decide that it's not fake?
Damn near everything you've ever accepted as true is stuff you were told or read and just accepted it based on how it was presented.
I believe that some popular news organizations are sufficiently trustworthy. At the very least, you can find sources that rank higher than others on the scale of trustworthiness.
This is why, in a lot of universities, they're trying to teach you how to learn, not necessarily how you should think.
We need to be able to examine the claims for ourselves and learn what red flags look like.
And a lot of the time we mix up "facts" with "opinions". Even when we are looking at facts, most of the time there are lies mixed with truth or conveniently forgotten truths. If we only get our information from a single source, or from biased sources, then we're going to miss some key information.
That's why it's good to make sure that you look at any story (especially politicized ones) from different angles and sources even if you don't agree with them.
Not only that but it can be enlightening to hear about a story from someone who's much more intimately familiar with the subject themselves.
For example, whenever it comes to news stories about the Supreme Court, I like to look for commentary from lawyers such as Steve Lehto or Legal Eagle. You'll find that they typically provide some very important context into why a particular decision was made that cuts through a lot of the outrage material that reporters push for clicks.
Yowza. My dad did the same until he died (shockingly, of COVID), so I just wanted to say I'm sorry. I know what it's like having a crazy parent and it sucks.
See, I'm not real big on facebook, but I have an account because I live a considerable distance from when I am from. (Also because marketplace is nice.)
Lately those cockballs have been refollowing people I have unfollowed and it is a clusterfuck on there now. I just have to ignore the feed because it's full of trump shit and religious shit yet again.
english.elpais.com
Hot