@mykhaylo@fosstodon.org Debatebrain: By bringing up rhetorical gotchas, you are annoying everyone.
And more importantly, ignoring the validity of the claims. It’s not a court, you can’t get it thrown out on a technicality; either the claim is valid or it’s not and, although the way the claim is conveyed can be worth mentioning, ignoring the claim itself and only assessing the conveyance method is just useless. @mykhaylo@fosstodon.org
Someone here is mad that their people are getting called out.
@yogthos This text uses several manipulative techniques:
- Biased language: The phrases “media hysteria”, “alleged Russian atrocities”, “rampages by Israeli troops and settlers” all communicate the author’s perspective or bias right off the bat, rather than presenting facts objectively. The strong language manipulates the reader’s empathy and emotions.
Your comments are textbook tone policing.
Wait, are you defending the occupation regime’s genocide of palestinians?
@yogthos oh my god dude, you’re a gold mine!
You should probably stick to the software side of the fediverse. I think you’re out of your league here.
Should he though? He’s trying to be a debate pervert on a Lemmy post from his mastodon account. Maybe that’s deliberate, so he doesn’t have to see all the down votes.
Lol, you might be right.
I’m guessing from the :clojure: in their profile that they’re a clojure dev. I recall seeing @yogthos@lemmy.ml mention on multiple occasions that he’s also a clojure developer. Is he Yogthos’s evil twin?
🤔
@yogthos 5. Use of emotionally charged language: The words like ‘hysteria’, ‘atrocities’, ‘rampages’ play with the emotions of the readers, leading them to take sides without looking into the facts.
Such manipulation could be intended to steer readers towards a particular point of view on these complex geopolitical issues.
Writing “objectively” is also biased, it just supports the status quo. I actually think it’s more deceitful to try and hide support of the status quo behind so called “objective language”, yog makes no effort to hide that he’s a communist and that is his bias.
For instance, the status quo opinion is that Israel is 100% justified in genocidng Palestinians. Couching our language to “let people come to their own conclusions” directly supports that genocide
Please keep your eyes open in the future to the media also using these terms. For example, every single time a peaceful protest gets pushed by the police into going violent. See how the media uses extremely charged verbiage during those situations.
Or how about every single time China or North Korea or Russia is brought up. No matter what the news story is about, they will always be labeled the bad guys. And sometimes they are, but sometimes they’re not.
Notice how the media will always talk about their “regimes” compare to our “government”, their “worker camps” vs our “prisons”. By the way our prisons also do force labor, and also torture people. How come our prisons aren’t worker camps? Or torture camps?
You’re going to see this if you keep watching osely, Communists have been talking about politically charged rhetoric for a very long time. We started calling out the government for using biased language long ago. See: Michael Parenti, for starters.
You could only find few words to base your thesis of manipulation when a news article gone contrary to what you have been manipulated to believe. You sure it isn’t really you who have been manipulated to believe in what you believe considering the media you consume is the one that uses those words heavily, creating a matrix of misinformation making it really difficult for you to keep your world view unaffected by that matrix you live in.
Use of emotionally charged language: The words like ‘hysteria’, ‘atrocities’, ‘rampages’ play with the emotions of the readers, leading them to take sides without looking into the facts.
This applies 10 fold to virtually all western media coverage of the Ukraine war.
@yogthos 3. Suppressed evidence or half-truths: The phrase “silence over the rampages,” suggests that there is no media coverage of issues in the occupied West Bank, which isn’t completely accurate. Many outlets do cover this topic, so the statement can be seen as manipulative.
- Misrepresentation: Calling the Russian actions in Ukraine “alleged” is a way of potentially downplaying the severity or validity of documented attacks or violations.
Another brooklynman! All debatebro, no substance
@yogthos 2. Loaded comparisons: By comparing two significantly different geopolitical situations, the writer is employing the technique of a false equivalence. The comparison is manipulative because it’s designed to imply an unfair bias in media coverage without fully demonstrating it.
I think you’re negative votes speak for themselves, but this is pretty obviously showing that there is Media bias.
I mean obviously it’s nearly impossible to prove that the media is not biased, what would a test for that even be? But showing where similar events get wildly different coverage does lead towards evidence that the media is biased.
Now, of course, the media can’t cover literally everything equally all the time. But let’s be honest, we know where the military lies, we know what the government is saying in official speeches, and we know what the media is pointing to. When everything lines up, it’s pretty fucking obvious.
