The named people are merely the central facilitators of the scheme. The general lack of consequences for the uber-wealthy named in the papers has been an ongoing theme, the lackeys getting away without a conviction is just the cherry on top.
That reminds me of when the ‘freedom’ convoy took their protest to a large city, and their protest ended up being just normal bad traffic. Obligatory Good Omens M25 YT scene.
In the first pilot project 2024, the funding is only available to students of the Technische Hochschule Augsburg in the MSc program
Gravity Is A Social Construct, And That’s Ok YT
Edit: I see you’ve already linked the video downthread.
I would be shocked if negative framing did not have an effect, but unfortunately a tasty negative angle is exactly the kind of bait an antagonistic press is likely to go for in order to give the action greater coverage.
I’ve lost count of how many people have come here confident that JustStopOil has ‘destroyed’ art or ‘damaged’ stonehenge, and a couple that think the private jet action was a failure because they didn’t paint Taylor Swift’s plane specifically. All of them angles that hacks in the press have taken with these stories. Luckily, bastions of media literacy like the Fediverse exist, and while many of these people are difficult to disabuse of their false narrative, the actual story has definitely gotten better vote scores. Lemmy has been an even better platform in this regard than Reddit, which is a massive win for what we’re trying to do here.
Oh, no! Not Lemmy downvotes! What will you trade in for equity when the Fediverse goes public?
Wunderbare Neuigkeiten!
You’re shifting goalposts and conflating two different groups with different ideas and tactics.
Just Stop Oil activists protest in museums with timeless paintings with great cultural and historic significance. They take care that their actions don’t irrevocably harm the art. The priceless quality of the art is essential to the message of the protest, as it contrasts with the priceless nature of what climate change is in the process of actually destroying.
The anti-genocide protester damaged a portrait of a British statesman displayed on the wall of a public area of Trinity College. This is part of a conceptually distinct form of protest where activists challenge public monuments to people with tainted legacies. The artistic merit of these products were pedestrian even for their time, and merely being old does not endow them with intrinsic cultural value. People concerned about the preservation of similar works have moved them to museums where their public display is less likely to be interpreted as an endorsement of their subject’s legacy. One could argue that a greater artistic value comes from the creative defacement of these publicly displayed political advertisements that have long-since outlived their historical moment.
Do you carry the same outrage toward the destruction of monuments to Confederate commanders or defacement on Nazi memorials?
Thank you for sharing the supporting article. Sometimes, evidence contradicts intuition. From your link:
Less is known about the relative impacts of non-violent but disruptive tactics. “Is it better to throw soup on a painting, or block traffic, or glue yourself to something?” says Dana Fisher, a sociologist at American University in Washington DC. “We don’t know which is the most effective.”
But there is evidence that these types of protest can have an impact. Social Change Lab gathered opinions in three surveys — each asking around 2,000 people — before, during and after disruptive protests in the United Kingdom by Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion in April 20228. The protesters blockaded oil depots and glued themselves to government buildings and oil-company offices. Most people who were surveyed opposed the actions, but continued to support climate policies and Just Stop Oil’s goals to stop new fossil-fuel projects. This counters the view that disruptive action can sour public opinion on an issue.
Overcoming bias is an essential part of science literacy in both acknowledging climate change as a phenomenon and policy change to prevent it.
Link: Paywalled. Experts? Dubious.
A page from the civil rights era:
Chicago Tribune 1966
Yes, they are suspected right-wing bots separated from the data-set based on a set of criteria that marks them as outliers.
The “supersharers” and “superconsumers” of fake news sources—those accountable for 80% of fake news sharing or exposure—dwarfed typical users in their affinity for fake news sources and, furthermore, in most measures of activity. For example, on average per day, the median super- sharer of fake news (SS-F) tweeted 71.0 times, whereas the median panel member tweeted only 0.1 times. The median SS-F also shared an average of 7.6 political URLs per day, of which 1.7 were from fake news sources. Similarly, the median superconsumer of fake news sources had almost 4700 daily exposures to political URLs, as compared with only 49 for the median panel member (additional statistics in SM S.9). The SS-F members even stood out among the overall supersharers and superconsumers, the most politically active accounts in the panel (Fig. 2). Given the high volume of posts shared or consumed by superspreaders of fake news, as well as indicators that some tweets were authored by apps, we find it likely that many of these accounts were cyborgs: partially automated accounts controlled by humans (15) (SM S.8 and S.9). Their tweets included some self-authored content, such as personal commentary or photos, but also a large volume of political re-tweets. For subsequent analyses, we set aside the supersharer and superconsumer outlier accounts and focused on the remaining 99% of the panel.
It’s not even close to fake news. Logarithmic scales are standard in this kind of visualization. The thrust of the result is that right-wing people share more fake news, and if you look at the graph, this is clear. If you mistake the X-axis as a linear scale, the result makes the effect less pronounced, not more.
So if anything, the graph undersells the thesis in the name of creating a more compact and readable visualization. There is no deception here.
Very nice! What method do you use to press the flowers?
@disguy_ovahea has no idea what he’s talking about. He apparently attended a couple of protests and thinks he’s now an expert on social change.
A horse race has about as much to do with women’s right to vote as Stonehenge does with climate change, but that didn’t stop Emily Davison’s direct action at the 1913 Epsom Derby from being a watershed moment in the struggle for women’s suffrage.
I really like her project, focus, and presentation. I appreciate that video makers need to have some kind of income.
Whenever BetterHelp is used to sponsor a video, I think this video (YT) should also appear.
I’m not calling for censorship of videos that use it as a sponsor, just spreading awareness of that vendor’s reputation and history. I know that making content for YouTube is an extremely stressful job, and having a reliable source of income greatly reduces that anxiety. I hope Abby Cox continues to make great videos, I really appreciate her attention to detail and thoughtfulness and empathy for people who most of society has swept under the rug.
You take credibility advice from an organization that proudly identifies itself as right of CBS News and The Weather Channel?
Isn’t that a little bit biased?
If you think the article is lying, say so. Don’t hide behind the ‘impartiality’ grift.
It should be noted that not only buying their food benefit Israel, it is often grown on internationally recognized Palestinian land stolen with violence by Israeli settlers. Centuries old olive orchards could have been uprooted to bring you those pomegranates.
I think you’re comparing us to HexBear? The mix of ideologies here is very different, with a larger proportion that subscribe to anarchist tendencies. We value good faith arguments over bad faith trolling. I’m glad you agree with most of the content hosted here.
Are You An Anarchist? The Answer May Surprise You!