General News

[ClaphamFox]

This piece from Janan Ganesh includes some interesting observations on why voters are becoming much more partisan and entrenched in their positions, and how social media has contributed to this:
 

https://www.ft.com/content/aef2dc1a-c8d1-4850-b59e-04758493cc09

[st albans fox]

31 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

This piece from Janan Ganesh includes some interesting observations on why voters are becoming much more partisan and entrenched in their positions, and how social media has contributed to this:
 

https://www.ft.com/content/aef2dc1a-c8d1-4850-b59e-04758493cc09

Without reading the article, I’m guessing that the SM algorithms that deliver content based on what you’ve already looked at and backing up the political stance of that content is largely responsible for people receiving their news in an echo chamber which just tells them that what they believe is fact and never offers any alternative angles or views  ??

[ClaphamFox]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Without reading the article, I’m guessing that the SM algorithms that deliver content based on what you’ve already looked at and backing up the political stance of that content is largely responsible for people receiving their news in an echo chamber which just tells them that what they believe is fact and never offers any alternative angles or views  ??

No, it's not about algorithms (I'm sure they play a part, but Ganesh doesn't mention them). It's about how publishing our opinions online has made it much more difficult for us to change our minds. Ganesh writes:

"One effect of social media gets too little attention. In the past, a citizen who took a political view they later came to regret could dump it without much embarrassment, like Homer Simpson backing into that hedge. This is because almost no one (including perhaps themself) would remember their initial stance. Now, there is likely to be a digital trail, in the form of a tweet, Facebook post or WhatsApp message.

 

"We have, as the kids say, the “receipts”. And so the social cost of changing one’s mind, the friction, is more than it was. We are all columnists now, even if the readership are just friends, family and colleagues.

 

"In 2003, a majority, not just a plurality, of Brits supported the Iraq war, according to YouGov. Over a decade later, the country “remembered” taking a different view. Nowadays, you’d sooner find someone who confessed to siding with the hunter against Bambi’s mother than backing the invasion. It is hard to know whether to feel horrified by this patent self-deception, or nostalgic for a time when people could slide in and out of viewpoints without leaving an incriminating residue.

 

"Either way, whether the cause is tech or a hunger for group membership in an atomised world, the effect is the same. A large share of those who turned to Maga around a decade ago will be there until the end."

[leicsmac]

45 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

This piece from Janan Ganesh includes some interesting observations on why voters are becoming much more partisan and entrenched in their positions, and how social media has contributed to this:
 

https://www.ft.com/content/aef2dc1a-c8d1-4850-b59e-04758493cc09

Interesting piece, thank you.

 

I'm reminded of two different quotes that have been used here before, one originating on this very forum:

 

"If everyone is seeing different messages then accountability is gone and public debate dead."

 

"The different cardinal truths neither clash nor mesh, no one is invalidated but no one is right. Not even natural selection can take place here. The world is being engulfed in "Truth". And this is the way the world ends. Not with a BANG, but with a whimper."

[st albans fox]

8 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

No, it's not about algorithms (I'm sure they play a part, but Ganesh doesn't mention them). It's about how publishing our opinions online has made it much more difficult for us to change our minds. Ganesh writes:

"One effect of social media gets too little attention. In the past, a citizen who took a political view they later came to regret could dump it without much embarrassment, like Homer Simpson backing into that hedge. This is because almost no one (including perhaps themself) would remember their initial stance. Now, there is likely to be a digital trail, in the form of a tweet, Facebook post or WhatsApp message.

 

"We have, as the kids say, the “receipts”. And so the social cost of changing one’s mind, the friction, is more than it was. We are all columnists now, even if the readership are just friends, family and colleagues.

 

"In 2003, a majority, not just a plurality, of Brits supported the Iraq war, according to YouGov. Over a decade later, the country “remembered” taking a different view. Nowadays, you’d sooner find someone who confessed to siding with the hunter against Bambi’s mother than backing the invasion. It is hard to know whether to feel horrified by this patent self-deception, or nostalgic for a time when people could slide in and out of viewpoints without leaving an incriminating residue.

 

"Either way, whether the cause is tech or a hunger for group membership in an atomised world, the effect is the same. A large share of those who turned to Maga around a decade ago will be there until the end."

Kids need to be taught that changing your mind is a good thing. 

[kenny]

16 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

No, it's not about algorithms (I'm sure they play a part, but Ganesh doesn't mention them). It's about how publishing our opinions online has made it much more difficult for us to change our minds. Ganesh writes:

"One effect of social media gets too little attention. In the past, a citizen who took a political view they later came to regret could dump it without much embarrassment, like Homer Simpson backing into that hedge. This is because almost no one (including perhaps themself) would remember their initial stance. Now, there is likely to be a digital trail, in the form of a tweet, Facebook post or WhatsApp message.

 

"We have, as the kids say, the “receipts”. And so the social cost of changing one’s mind, the friction, is more than it was. We are all columnists now, even if the readership are just friends, family and colleagues.

 

"In 2003, a majority, not just a plurality, of Brits supported the Iraq war, according to YouGov. Over a decade later, the country “remembered” taking a different view. Nowadays, you’d sooner find someone who confessed to siding with the hunter against Bambi’s mother than backing the invasion. It is hard to know whether to feel horrified by this patent self-deception, or nostalgic for a time when people could slide in and out of viewpoints without leaving an incriminating residue.

 

"Either way, whether the cause is tech or a hunger for group membership in an atomised world, the effect is the same. A large share of those who turned to Maga around a decade ago will be there until the end."

Another discussion point is that 'the kids' are hooked on shorts.

 

So they ingest lots of short videos meaning all they hear politically are quick soundbites. Farage is the master of these, whereas your traditional politicians will talk at length by which time they have lost the audience. An interview or monologue doesn't work on tiktok either.

[leicsmac]

It's an unfortunate fact that the problem has been there or thereabouts for some time now.

 

The much more difficult matter is finding a workable solution when the clock is ticking. Which it is.

[bmt]

57 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

No, it's not about algorithms (I'm sure they play a part, but Ganesh doesn't mention them). It's about how publishing our opinions online has made it much more difficult for us to change our minds. Ganesh writes:

"One effect of social media gets too little attention. In the past, a citizen who took a political view they later came to regret could dump it without much embarrassment, like Homer Simpson backing into that hedge. This is because almost no one (including perhaps themself) would remember their initial stance. Now, there is likely to be a digital trail, in the form of a tweet, Facebook post or WhatsApp message.

 

"We have, as the kids say, the “receipts”. And so the social cost of changing one’s mind, the friction, is more than it was. We are all columnists now, even if the readership are just friends, family and colleagues.

 

"In 2003, a majority, not just a plurality, of Brits supported the Iraq war, according to YouGov. Over a decade later, the country “remembered” taking a different view. Nowadays, you’d sooner find someone who confessed to siding with the hunter against Bambi’s mother than backing the invasion. It is hard to know whether to feel horrified by this patent self-deception, or nostalgic for a time when people could slide in and out of viewpoints without leaving an incriminating residue.

 

"Either way, whether the cause is tech or a hunger for group membership in an atomised world, the effect is the same. A large share of those who turned to Maga around a decade ago will be there until the end."

Sorry - I can't access the FT. Do they provide any evidence for this? 

 

In the short run it makes sense but I'm not sure that in the long run that has anywhere near as much impact as the algorithm argument above. Just seems like a hypothesis someone has made.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, bmt said:

Sorry - I can't access the FT. Do they provide any evidence for this? 

 

In the short run it makes sense but I'm not sure that in the long run that has anywhere near as much impact as the algorithm argument above. Just seems like a hypothesis someone has made.

I would absolutely not recommend using https://archive.is and you absolutely should not simply enter the FT web address into the search bar when you're there.

[WigstonWanderer]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I don't get a vote over here as yet, but the Liberal opposition were incoherent in policy terms and led by a man who while apparently likeable in person doesn't carry that onto the TV screen at all.  While I wouldn't get too excited, it is a positive that the right cannot get themselves organised.

I’ve never found Dutton likeable, but I will give him credit for his gracious speech conceding the election. A massive point of distinction between the proper democracies (like UK, Australia, Canada) and the shite setup they’ve now got in the States. Last time I looked at the democracy index the US was described as a “flawed democracy”.

[Dr The Singh]

4 hours ago, Robo61 said:

This agreement hasn't changed anything  with regard Visa's for Indian nationals, so any loopholes you are looking to exploit are not down to the current government. 

I didn't mention loopholes, it's the assumtion that we become alot more popular for Indian Nationals with the NI changes, and we/UK can leverage that interms of salaries.

 

I haven't read the details on the changes but Labour are saying:

 

The UK's Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the deal would make it easier for people with certain skills to work in the UK temporarily.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

I would absolutely not recommend using https://archive.is and you absolutely should not simply enter the FT web address into the search bar when you're there.

Disgraceful. Next you’ll be not recommending 12ft.io or just pasting a url into a chatbot if neither of the others work. Shame on you. 

[WigstonWanderer]

Holy shit! No idea if this is authentic or not, just came across it on YouTube.

 

 

 

[Izzy]

Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel.

 

Cardinals, you've got one job.

[Paninistickers]

1 hour ago, Izzy said:

Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel.

 

Cardinals, you've got one job.

You'd think nowadays you'd get grapefruit vape being puffed out ....

 

Do you reckon they drag it out though? Must be nice having a few days chilling, nothing to do but natter, eat Bolognese and quaff red wine

[urban.spaceman]

2 hours ago, Izzy said:

Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel.

 

Cardinals, you've got one job.

How many of them have popped down the bookies for specifically next Monday?

[foxy boxing]

2 hours ago, Izzy said:

Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel.

 

Cardinals, you've got one job.

We already know its going to be someone white, old and decrepit. Someone who will eventually lose all their faculties which will make them more endearing to the masses.

[urban.spaceman]

13 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

We already know its going to be someone white, old and decrepit. Someone who will eventually lose all their faculties which will make them more endearing to the masses.

That’s the spirit

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, foxy boxing said:

We already know its going to be someone white, old and decrepit. Someone who will eventually lose all their faculties which will make them more endearing to the masses.

Is this the "Our Next Manager" thread?

[urban.spaceman]

Technically speaking Grimes is right.

 

Never thought I’d actually say that. 

 

[Jattdogg]

5 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

You'd think nowadays you'd get grapefruit vape being puffed out ....

 

Do you reckon they drag it out though? Must be nice having a few days chilling, nothing to do but natter, eat Bolognese and quaff red wine

....They are celibate....kind of a major downside depending on how you look at those things

 

4 hours ago, foxy boxing said:

We already know its going to be someone white, old and decrepit. Someone who will eventually lose all their faculties which will make them more endearing to the masses.

I mean, could be a black cardinal from Africa or a Filipino cardinal. Never know,  not that I care as a non catholic.

[Mike Oxlong]

9 hours ago, Izzy said:

Black smoke from the Sistine Chapel.

 

Cardinals, you've got one job.

You'd think they'd keep off the bongs with such a big decision to make 

[leicsmac]

It will be interesting to see what kind of agreement the UK and US have come to regarding those tariffs.

[foxy boxing]

31 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It will be interesting to see what kind of agreement the UK and US have come to regarding those tariffs.

They will probably negotiate that we have to accept American chlorinated chicken or the like, honestly our politicians are absolutely cr£p at negotiations. Always operating from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength. 

[leicsmac]

16 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

They will probably negotiate that we have to accept American chlorinated chicken or the like, honestly our politicians are absolutely cr£p at negotiations. Always operating from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength. 

I hope you're wrong, but I guess we'll find out in due course.