• Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Don’t act like Walz wiping the floor with Vance is a forgone conclusion, it’s not. That’s what people thought about Biden’s debate. Whether we admit it or not, there’s intelligent Republican debaters who can’t be baited out there, Trump just isn’t one of them.

    I genuinely wonder if the best option wouldn’t be to refuse the VP debate until live, fact-checking is in place for both candidates. That, or correcting simple untruths didn’t count toward their time. I love Tom Walz, but if he has to literally spend his entire time refuting very obvious lies continuously spewed by Vance, his time would be better spent campaigning in swing states. How much does a Vice-Presidential campaign really matter, anyway?

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Part of the problem is that nearly every sentence trump spoke was a lie, so fact checking was not 100%. They just fact checked random things, like, nobody is eating our pets. ProfessorWeKnowDis.gif

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    4 hours ago

    If there is no fact checking, Kamala needs to be ready to ask why Trump nominated someone who isn’t allowed in any Ashley Furniture store in the lower 48 states and Alberta.

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 hours ago

    He has no power to shut down a major news network, so one must ask why they decided to change the policy. It is not because of Trump’s impotent threats.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Because they want a piece of that sweet, lucrative, “insane spectacle” money. The execs don’t care, as long as they get paid.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Some people are under the mistaken impression that corporate news is not run specifically by republiQans to promote conservatism.

    🌎🧑‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Is this one though, or are they merely… “useful”?

      My own point is that if those two are functionally indistinguishable, then that should tell us something about how dangerous the situation has become.

      Very nice emojis btw!

    • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, Trump isn’t what’s killing free speech.

      Trump is a symptom, not the cause: conservatism is the real problem here. I keep saying this, but as long as we keep allowing conservatives to reach positions of power, shit like this – and worse – will keep happening.

      • OpenStars@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Trump is both a symptom, of some deeper underlying issues, and a cause, of feed-forwarding those same issues - e.g. amplifying their power and their spread beyond what they would have done without his help.

        Many people thought that Ron Desantis would take Trump’s place - that speaks to Trump being a mere symptom. However, Ron had no chance to win the the overall presidential election - that speaks to how crucial Trump is specifically to it, in its current form I mean.

        The Alt Right Playbook, by Innuendo Studios, describes conservatism so much better than I ever could though.

      • Orbituary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Let’s have a talk about social media platform censorship. Tiktok and YouTube members who self censor common words like death or rape in legitimate conversations about the topics are learning to temper their language or face consequences. Unimportant consequences.

        It may seem small by comparison, but if you condition it at a low level, each step beyond is easy to swallow. Spread it out over an entire population, and you see huge results.

        • Spunky Monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          You just described Newspeak (Nineteen Eighty-Four novel):

          Newspeak, which is a controlled language of simplified grammar and limited vocabulary designed to limit a person’s ability for critical thinking. The Newspeak language thus limits the person’s ability to articulate and communicate abstract concepts, such as personal identity, self-expression, and free will,[1][2] which are thoughtcrimes, acts of personal independence that contradict the ideological orthodoxy of Ingsoc collectivism.[3][4]

          Source

          • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            4 hours ago

            It’s a lot more banal, though. Youtube has to sell advertising, and advertisers don’t want to be next to discussions of rape or suicide. These restrictions are enforced algorithmically, hence the self-censorship. And in any case, it doesn’t achieve the objective of newspeak, as those concepts are still being discussed.

            • DogWater@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 minutes ago

              I don’t think it’s right to divorce the censorship from the result just because the justification is different.

              What I mean is that even though that conditioning is taking place for a banal reason it’s still true that it’s conditioning and will affect the acceptance of moves like this debate fact checking decision that are serious and do have consequences. So therefore it still matters and is still dangerous.

            • Spunky Monkey@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              And in any case, it doesn’t achieve the objective of newspeak, as those concepts are still being discussed.

              Yet.

              But I get what you are saying. I just find the similarities, although banal, kind of funny. In a scary kind of way.

          • amio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            Newspeak was an intentional in-universe conlang designed and handed down by Ingsoc based on “how you speak affects how you think” (which is a hypothesis that has… some kind of name). This is a bunch of people trivially avoiding automated filtering like it’s been done since the first puritan implemented the first world filter.

            One of the main differences is that self-censoring seggs and raep and ahh-es or whatever still leaves it plenty obvious what you mean, it just outs you as a Tiktok user. Conceptually word filters are a blacklist whereas Newspeak was intended to be a whitelist with the restrictiveness that entails.

          • Orbituary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I did pick up what Orwell was putting down. It’s definitely helped shaped my view of the world.

  • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s not that Trump is killing anything; no more than millenials killed anything. It’s the media that’s the problem. If we’re going to blame anybody for failed media, then let’s blame the appropriate people. Instead of giving them a scape goat, we hold their feet to the fire.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      This. They made the choice not because Trump is a whiny little baby, but because they see dollar signs by allowing him to make a spectacle.

  • Pavidus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I kinda wanna see the entire debate evolve into ludicrous, outlandish claims back and forth. Just sheer comedy. I know this isn’t the right way to fix anything, but it’s what we deserve at this point for letting the situation get this far unchecked.

  • shutz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Is the debate being simulcast on all the major networks? I seem to remember seeing the Trump/Harris debate on ABC, CBS and NBC (just with different talking heads before and after).

    If so, ABC should broadcast the debate with fact-checking overlays (Pop-up video style?) and advertise the shit out of the fact that they’ll be doing this.