• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheLostBigBoss

Banned
TheFatOne said:
So if I understand this mornings event correctly Trump is now going to allege that a Mexican billionaire is behind this global conspiracy against him, and that is proof that these woman are lying? Did I hear that right on MSNBC or am I mistaken because that sounds like Banon. It also sound like a horrendous strategy to win an election. I don't get this strategy by Banon/Trump at all. They do know that this won't depress dems right? And it's quite possibly going to have the exact opposite effect they want. They have really bought into their own hype.

Edit: Damn Obama is such a pro. Has to burn these guys hearing him start a Hilary chant lol
Click to expand...

Like others have said, I think it's a post-election plan to create some type of alt-right media network. You think Roger Ailes is just going to go into the night and not take a golden opportunity like this?
 
H

Hydrophobic

Member
God damn I loved the response to Carson's question about if MSNBC was biased. 'I think all networks are biased' is the fucking truth. Perfect is the enemy of good, after all. If we try to find completely unbiased news then we'll never have any news sources.
 
B

Boke1879

Member
So I another Trump accuser will be coming forward this morning

And Trump will say a Mexican billionaire is responsible for all of this? Do i have that right?


Also yea if those Florida numbers hold she'll probably win the state before the 8th. Would be nice to have Florida called early
 
C

Cyanity

Banned
Person on Reddit just made a great analogy about Trump and his complaining about media bias:

"Trump is like a guy doing jumping jacks in the middle of a funeral who is then offended that everyone is staring at him."
 
B

Blader

Member
TheLostBigBoss said:
Like others have said, I think it's a post-election plan to create some type of alt-right media network. You think Roger Ailes is just going to go into the night and not take a golden opportunity like this?
Click to expand...

Ailes has a non-compete deal, though I don't know for how long. If it's any less than five years then the Murdochs really fucked themselves.
 
sazzy

sazzy

Member
vVJLBH.png
 
K

kmag

Member
chadskin said:
Well to be fair, he said "a lesser right to privacy", not "no right to privacy."

Still disagree with him on this, though.
Click to expand...

Full dumps like this are always mindless. As the article points out you could make a case for Podesta to have a lesser right of privacy, but some of the people who emailed him? If I'm Podesta's old high school pal Joe who works as a dentist, and I email Podesta saying I think I might be gay/my wife is having an affair/I'm having an affair/my son has cancer (whatever) should that be made public knowledge just because I had the misfortune to email my friend?

If there's anything directly newsworthy in a leak then by all means print it but Wikileaks don't give a fuck, leak everything has always been so fucking childish and shortsighted it's mindboggling. They're lucky I don't control armed drones.
 
T

tedrotheredro

Member
jiggle said:
Are we expecting any oppo bomb today?
Should I cancel all plans?
Click to expand...

Well, last Friday was the tape drop.

We know there is another victim coming up represented by Gloria Allred, and the "evidence" of Donald not being a sexual predator is coming today, too.

So, yeah, see what you can do about those plans.
 
O

Outdoor Miner

Member
Hill-GAF pissed the Russians off and now we are under attack.

In before leaked Adam emails controversy. (his Risotto recipe will guarantee make you barf)
 
T

Toxi

Banned
Hydrophobic said:
This kind of justification is what I hear about paparazzi in regards to celebrity privacy and I don't really buy it there either. If you can't get this dude's emails through the FOIA then maybe it's not really fair to publish them. Like, the logic here we're seeing feels like the same logic that was used when iCloud got hacked and a bunch of celebrities had naked photos leaked.

"They shouldn't have taken those pictures in the first place! There was always a risk it could get out!"
(He shouldn't have written that stuff in emails in the first place, there was always a risk it could get out)

No one should have to live their life with an assumption that their personal correspondence or private information could be leaked to the public at large at any given time.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder what Glenn Greenwald thinks about Gawker releasing Hulk Hogan's private sex tape.
 
L

Loxley

Member
So, if "confirmation bias" is "the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities." (that's the Wiki definition, anyway).

Is there a term for the opposite? Like, the tendency to disbelieve information because it flies in the face of your preexisting beliefs or hypotheses? I was trying to find a way to describe Trump voters who still refuse to believe any of this awful shit about him and that's all one big liberal conspiracy :p
 
B

Boke1879

Member
First off any events today? I see Hillary is having an event. Any other surrogates out there?

Seems like Hillary will again use this weekend to prep which is good. It'll be the last debate and she needs to win.

People calling for an oppo dump IMO have just gotten caught up in the excitement of it all. Trump is supposedly going to show evidence that this isn't the case. The simple face that he has to do that isn't a good look and still sets attention on the tape and his accusers. Not to mention another accuser is coming forward today and will no doubt give her account.
 
V

Veritigo_X

Member
jiggle said:
Are we expecting any oppo bomb today?
Should I cancel all plans?
Click to expand...

Maybe a couple more accusers coming forward, but I wouldn't expect anything big today. If any big tapes actually exist it would make more sense to drop those next week before the debate.
 
T

Teggy

Member
Sounds like Obama is going scorched earth on Republicans. They had their chance to disavow Trump, so now they will own him.
 
F

Father_Brain

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/10/13/hacked-emails-privacy-vs-transparency/#.V_-bIEPpU8E.twitter



Greenwald doesn't care about privacy.
Click to expand...

While I doubt this will change anyone's mind here, you should probably refer to Greenwald's own words rather than someone else's paraphrasing.

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/13...rting-on-the-podesta-archive-is-an-easy-call/

3. The more public power someone has, the less privacy they are entitled to claim

Last night, I was on Chris Hayes’s show (video below) discussing the Podesta email leak and made this point, and some people reacted as though this were some bizarre, exotic claim — rather than what it is: the fundamental principle of journalism as well the basis of numerous laws. Of course it’s the case that the more power someone has, the less privacy they have, and every media outlet, literally every day, operates on that principle, as do multiple sectors of law.

That there are different standards of privacy for different people based on their power and position is axiomatic. That’s why laws like FOIA requiring disclosure (including of emails) apply only to public officials but not to private citizens: It embraces the proposition that those who wield public power submit to greater transparency than private citizens do. This same principle is why people cheered when the NYT published Trump’s tax return even though they’d be horrified if the NYT published the tax return of ordinary citizens — because people like Trump who wield or seek great political power sacrifice some degree of privacy.

Media outlets constantly report on the private matters of powerful people or institutions that they would never even consider exposing if it involved non-powerful actors. When Paul Manafort became Trump’s campaign chairman, his financial transactions were of much greater public interest than they were when he was just a private citizen. And various realms of law, such as the law of defamation, impose different standards on public figures than on private citizens.

John Podesta is easily one of the most powerful people in the country. He’s a former White House chief of staff, current campaign chairman for the candidate highly likely to be the most powerful official on the planet within less than three months, and almost certain to occupy a top position in the Clinton White House. This does not mean, of course, that he has no privacy: His communications of a purely private or personal nature should not be published or reported.

But it’s beyond dispute that the public interest in knowing what he is doing and saying regarding public matters is much higher than it is for ordinary citizens. That’s why every media outlet in the country has reported on the content of his emails even though they would not report on the emails of people with no political power: because all media outlets regard the privacy entitlement of powerful, political figures as less than that of ordinary, private actors.
Click to expand...
 
F

Father_Brain

Banned
kmag said:
Full dumps like this are always mindless. As the article points out you could make a case for Podesta to have a lesser right of privacy, but some of the people who emailed him? If I'm Podesta's old high school pal Joe who works as a dentist, and I email Podesta saying I think I might be gay/my wife is having an affair/I'm having an affair/my son has cancer (whatever) should that be made public knowledge just because I had the misfortune to email my friend?

If there's anything directly newsworthy in a leak then by all means print it but Wikileaks don't give a fuck, leak everything has always been so fucking childish and shortsighted it's mindboggling. They're lucky I don't control armed drones.
Click to expand...

Can you point me to where Greenwald has ever supported publicly leaking that sort of purely personal email?
 
C

crowphoenix

Banned
Loxley said:
So, if "confirmation bias" is "the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities." (that's the Wiki definition, anyway).

Is there a term for the opposite? Like, the tendency to disbelieve information because it flies in the face of your preexisting beliefs or hypotheses? I was trying to find a way to describe Trump voters who still refuse to believe any of this awful shit about him and that's all one big liberal conspiracy :p
Click to expand...
The closet that I can find is Motivated Reasoning, which seems to be the tendency for emotion to guide or motivate how one reasons through things.
 
C

Cyanity

Banned
Loxley said:
So, if "confirmation bias" is "the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities." (that's the Wiki definition, anyway).

Is there a term for the opposite? Like, the tendency to disbelieve information because it flies in the face of your preexisting beliefs or hypotheses? I was trying to find a way to describe Trump voters who still refuse to believe any of this awful shit about him and that's all one big liberal conspiracy :p
Click to expand...


Aggravated cognitive dissonance
 
A

Atomic Playboy

Member
NYCmetsfan said:
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/10/13/hacked-emails-privacy-vs-transparency/#.V_-bIEPpU8E.twitter

Then Greenwald launched a question that might be even more pertinent, given that we are now talking about hacked private emails. He said that journalists have to ask themselves: “Is this person powerful enough to justify the invasion of privacy from publishing and is the material enough in the public interest?” That prompted a very significant question from Hayes: “Does John Podesta have a right to privacy?” Greenwald responded by saying that he had a lesser right to privacy than the average person on the street due to the fact that he is powerful.
Click to expand...

Greenwald doesn't care about privacy.
Click to expand...

My favorite take on this (and I forgot where I read this so apologies for posting it without attribution), is that in 1973 there was bipartisan support for impeaching the President (who eventually resigned) for breaking into the DNC headquarters to steal private information in order to win reelection. Everyone understood that stealing things was wrong. In 2016, a foreign power is stealing and releasing hacked data from the DNC and lots of people just handwave it away as "well, they shouldn't expect privacy." How did we get here? What has happened to our values? "Famous people aren't entitled to privacy" is an absurd opinion. 43 years ago it was enough to take down a President, and now we get foreign nations involved and nobody bats an eye.
 
S

SparkleMotion

Member
When is Donald Trump going to release his taxes? He said he would, and even Mike Pence doubled down on the fact that Trump will release his taxes. However, we're getting really close to the day of the election.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
234
42K
Bloobs replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
Top Bottom