back to article It's true, social media moderators do go after conservatives

Since Elon Musk bought Twitter nearly two years ago – a $44 billion acquisition he tried to pull out of – the mogul has driven a narrative that moderation of the microblogging website disproportionately targeted conservatives, libertarians, and Trump supporters. A scientific paper published in the journal Nature this week …

  1. Khaptain Silver badge

    Who is the judge ?

    Every time that the word "misinformation" is deployed one should immediately ask oneself, who is the Judge ?

    Misinformation, at least in my opinion, now seems to mean anything that doesn't agree with whoever's narrative.. Whether that be on the left or the right..

    Since most of the media is controlled by the left it is to understand why those on the right are most often targeted.

    This is pushing everyone, left and right, to the extremes and nothing good will come of it.

    If the narratives don't start calming down we are headed straight for our own societal destruction, there will be no winners on either side, everyone will lose...

    1. demon driver

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      So you claim there is no such thing as true or false? There never, ever can be a plausible fact checking? Everything is just "narrative", fact's don't exist?

      If that was the case, we could just as well stop listening, stop talking, stop writing, stop communicating. Shut down the media, shut down the internet.

      1. cornetman Silver badge

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        > So you claim there is no such thing as true or false? There never, ever can be a plausible fact checking? Everything is just "narrative", fact's don't exist?

        There *is* objective truth. However, the accusation of misinformation as been used against those suggesting that the prevailing narrative is actually false. There is a good reason that the term is used instead of "lying". If it was really all about truth and falsehood, then they would just be labelled as liars.

        The oft quoted example is the ineffectiveness of home-made masks during the pandemic. It was known quite early that non-medical masks were worse than useless in the spread of the virus (worse because it made people feel more comfortable with close proximity to others).

        1. Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          The lying vs misinformation distinction is pure customer relations bullshit. If you were suspended from Xitter for lying, what are the chances you would remain a customer and come back after the suspension ended, after they called you a liar?

          Masks, by the way - any mask is better than no mask. N95 is much better than a piece of fabric. I had to go through seven different makes of N95 before I found one that fit-tested adequately. 18 months as a frontline health care worker in the middle of the pandemic and I didn't get COVID. Two weeks after the mask mandate ended, I caught it from another hospital employee, who showed up for work while unwell.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            How long will people believe that simple masks block viruses?

            Just compare the size of the gauze to a virus - that's assuming you have, as you did, a mask that fits and doesn't vent at the sides, which was most of what people wore. It was part of the Psyop to instil fear.

            1. khjohansen

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              The "simple" mask - worn everyday by health professionals - does not protect YOU from the environment. It protects others from YOU.

              Grasping that this can benefit EVERYBODY seems really hard for some people ...

              1. Missing Semicolon Silver badge

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                Yet we see people with basic masks, thinking it protects themselves from infection. *They* have believed misinformation - that they heard through "verified" sources.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                YOU are a component of EVERBODY? Its not a one way street. All those who believe the plandemic narrative should get lots of shots so you are protected.

                Actually don't I'm not that heartless.

              3. MachDiamond Silver badge

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                "The "simple" mask - worn everyday by health professionals - does not protect YOU from the environment. It protects others from YOU."

                ..... if used correctly. The vast majority of people don't use them correctly and I'd be very cautions about those that grasp the mask directly in front of their nose/mouth and then touch something which people do all of the time. Masks will irritate your face and adjusting them is a natural reaction, but you have to train yourself to grip the bands at the side and not the mask itself.

                This misinformation/half truth in the example of masks was that they would protect YOU and people continue to believe that. That was also the narrative by many politicians mainly because they are usually attorneys and not medically trained as well as it being an over simplified summary. A mask can protect you a little bit, but the pores are larger than viruses, they are often used incorrectly and the more thorough explanations wind up at TL:DR.

                When one gets to things such as Hunter Biden's laptop, those trying to insulate the US President were saying that reports on what was on it were "misinformation". The ol' "deny, deny, deny". Yep, they were liars as it turns out that they finally had to admit that the idiot was stupid enough to have photos and videos of himself with illicit drugs, weapons, women of negotiable affection and that sort of thing. Perhaps he was too blitzed to remember having a grand time and need some memory aides.

                There term 'misinformation' is used so frequently now that it's true definition is being diluted. It's now anything you want it to mean, Lie, half truth, inconvenient truth, something that somebody said that you want covered up.

            2. Ian Johnston Silver badge

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              What do you think the size of viruses has to do with a disease spread by water droplets?

              1. James Hughes 1

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                My thoughts exactly. Viruses are indeed small, but water droplets are their chosen form of commuter vehicle.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                Viruses spread in droplets, in aerosols (some barely bigger than a virus) and free in the air. Masks worked great, they made you scared, they lowered your 02 level and the harbored bacteria. Go get some more vaccine, its safe and effective.

                1. Hubert Cumberdale Silver badge

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  Masks have zero effect on oxygen levels. As shown by multiple peer-reviewed studies. Although I'm guessing you're the sort of person who thinks that all scientists are involved in some kind of conspiracy.*

                  *(Seriously: have you met any real scientists? Most of them can barely organise a pub trip, let alone a huge conspiracy. I should know. But I guess that makes me part of the problem.)

                2. Noram

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  You can very easily check your O2 levels...

                  the equipment is really cheap (under £20 for a half decent brand).

                  And as one of the other posters has said, many studies have shown that masks don't lower your O2, as they're designed to allow gases like oxygen and carbon dioxide through (if you want a "mask" that stops normal gasses you'll need something that has it's own air supply).

                  Certainly not the sort of masks that are worn normally to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

                  From a personal note, I've used both "proper" respirators (IIRC P3E2 filters), and things like the 3MAura disposable masks, neither affected my O2 levels, although the proper respirator was very uncomfortable after a few hours (fortunately I was wearing it for hobby stuff so could just stop and take a break).

                3. Wizardling

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  Your claim that fabric masks lower O2 levels is absurd piffle of the kind that can only survive thanks to lies and misinformation. Whatever point you thought you were trying to make, you just made the opposite in the minds of rational people.

                4. Random person

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  In 2020 a hosptial doctor ran 22 miles wearing a mask, his O2 levels were at 98-99% throughout.

                  > “I work in intensive care, I know physiology so I knew that this wasn’t true,” he told CTV News. His goal: to run a 35K (about 21.74 miles) around his hometown of Bradford, U.K., while wearing a face mask and tracking his oxygen levels.

                  > ...

                  > Lawton monitored his oxygen levels during his entire run using a pulse oximeter to track actual data of how the mask impacted his breathing. He checked his oxygen levels every half hour during his run, ... “The [reading was] 98 to 99 all the time, completely normal oxygen levels all the way,” he says. Translation: He had no breathing problems during his entire run.

                  https://www.menshealth.com/fitness/a33521706/face-mask-oxygen-levels-running-myth-coronavirus-doctor-fact-check/

                  Study of impact of mask wearing on patients with COPD https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9993157/

                  Do you think that people working in operating theatres for long periods have low oxygen levels?

                  1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                    Unhappy

                    "Do you think that people working in operating theatres for long periods have low oxygen levels?"

                    That's one of those existence proofs that discredit the whole narrative.

                    Such a pity more people didn't think of it.

              3. MachDiamond Silver badge

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                "What do you think the size of viruses has to do with a disease spread by water droplets?"

                It goes back to the improper use of the mask. If you constantly grip the mask in front of your nose/mouth, you push those water droplets through the mask and moisture on both sides provides a nice highway for bacteria and viruses to transfer. What works much better is a positive pressure system that pulls air through a filter so there's a constant flow of filtered air going out or a mask that isn't contacting your face.

            3. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              Just compare the size of the gauze to a virus - that's assuming you have, as you did, a mask that fits and doesn't vent at the sides, which was most of what people wore. It was part of the Psyop to instil fear.

              Or people wearing masks, but not covering their nose. Or people re-using their mask, or not washing designer fabric masks. Proper medical advice is to change masks frequently because you're inhaling/exhaling into a warm, damp fabric that's perfect for breeding bugs.. Then increasing respiratory infections, so if the mask wearer does encounter Covid, it's likely to do more harm.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                There's no evidence that masks became more dangerous after a few hours, but there is indeed a recommended max wear time if worn continuously like medical staff, I think it was 4 hours or so as the mask becomes less effective.

                If worn 'on and off' like people going out for a quick shopping trip and then returning home tolerance was better. Can't recall why now, I think it had something to do with saturation, but it was something like 24h.

            4. Roj Blake Silver badge

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              You're not emitting individual virus molecules though!

              You're emitting droplets containing the virus.

              And those droplets can be stopped by the right mask.

            5. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              Oh dear.

              Here's a simple fact that people miss: you are constantly pretty much bombarded with viruses, bacteria and other things that can harm you.

              The reason you're not permanently parked in bed is because your body can handle that, provided it doesn't get overwhelmed or doesn't know how to deal with a new pathogen. This is what the Covid vaccin did: unlike 'traditional' vaccins such as the flu virus which contains weakened/dead bit of Bad Stuff for the body to analyse and eventually work out how to address it, the Covid vaccine was more like handing your body an instruction manual on how to deal with Covid without the need to introduce the virus itself (that skipping a few steps was a quiet revolution in itself, by the way).

              If you get a whiff of Covid your body may be able to get rid of it before it multiplies, and that happens by Covid in your nose (hence the prodding for tests there, although the depth made me sometimes think the testers were after a piece of brain tissue). So, lower the volume of what you take in and you lower the chance of getting it in a sufficient volume to multiply, and holding your breath is for most people not practical.. When it has taken hold regardless, if vaccinated (or having had a strain before) your body knows how to fight it. By teaching your immune system how to handle it, the Covid vaccin reduced what was once seriously deadly (a lot of people have forgotten just how many it killed) to something that for most people is now merely annoying for a few days. If you catch a small enough whiff of it (read: wear a decent mask, and I'll get to those later) it may even nuke the bit that came through before it gets that chance to develop into full blown Covid. Caveat: if your immune system is weak or weakened, any pathogen can kill you anyway, ditto for Covid.

              Now, masks. Yes, it also protects people from you if you have Covid, but it depends on the mask. For a start, any mask, even the DIY cloth things we made for a while, reduces air flow and thus reduces distribution reach. Not that those did a fantastic job, but it was still better than nothing. What makes the N95 and N98 masks special is that they not only have a better filter, but one of those filter layers is electrostatically charged and so hangs on to particles that pure filtration alone would not stop. You'll find that the later N98 masks also had a much better shaped foam nose piece because that's where those masks leaked (I know because I still have quite a few of them), but even with that leak they were able to catch quite a few particles - inbound as well as outbound.

              There is, however, one massive caveat with those masks: they expire. That electrostatic sheet will eventually lose its charge (3..5 years after manufacturing) and then they will no longer perform 100% to their original spec - that's what the expiry date on the box is for.

              But even then they will still be much better than nothing.

              BTW, hang on to those masks anyway. Covid won't be the last virus..

          2. This post has been deleted by its author

          3. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            "what are the chances you would remain a customer and come back after the suspension ended, after they called you a liar?"

            I think you mean "user" and not "customer". Companies placing ads are the customers of Xitter, not the people posting short quips.

          4. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            I only wore THIS mask (see icon) to protest the stupidity of masking, and told everyone so at every opportunity, until the madness was over, and then I just outright REBELLED and wore NO MASK. Now I make fun of people who DO wear masks... heh heh heh - yeah had to post 'anon' to get the guy fawkes mask but I'm sure you all know who this is.

            Rather Bombastic, doncha think?

      2. Lon24

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Yep, the speed of light is merely an opinion. I say it is half that of the lying lefty scientific consensus. The new administration should legislate that and all scientific calculations should obey the law of the elected politicians.

        Oops it's all gone dark ....

        1. Ian Johnston Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          Luce Irigaray claimed that E = mc2 is a "sexed equation" because "it privileges the speed of light over other speeds that are vitally necessary to us".

          1. MiguelC Silver badge
        2. Tom Graham

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          The speed of light is real. It's discovery is over a century old.

          Unfortunately over half of papers published now in science, medicine and "social science" are misinformation. When they are tested, they don't replicate.

          The study referred to in this article is certainly in that group.

          1. AVR Bronze badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            Is it certainly in this group because you don't like it, and what you dislike must be wrong, or is there some objective reason for believing so?

          2. Roj Blake Silver badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            How did you arrive at the conclusion that over half of papers are misinformation?

            Can you cite a scientific study to support your view?

        3. IvyKing Bronze badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          The speed of light can easily be measured by experiment, though one needs to be aware that the measured speed of light will depend on the media that the light is traveling through - a high vacuum gives the most consistent results. There's also observational data suggesting the the velocity of propagation for gravity waves is equal to that of light to within 1 part in ~10E15.

          With respect to Covid, masks and vaccine, it is misinformation to imply that a gauze type mask will work anywhere near as well as a properly fitted N-95 mask and that vaccines prevent infections completely - what they do is prompt the body to respond much faster to any infection. In the spring of 2020, there was significant evidence that Covid spread much less rapidly outdoors than indoors, but many governments were forcing people to stay inside.

      3. jake Silver badge

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        The argument style is from the school of sophism, and is the tool of those griping about their "alternative facts" being called out as the lies that they are.

        These people are either deluded and/or deeply disturbed, or scammers after a quick buck. Or some combination.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Meh

        "So you claim there is no such thing as true or false? "

        I wish we had an icon for strawman.

        \ /

        |

        /o\

        Are you 10 years old?

        There are 'all trues' and 'all falses'. We merely see our narrow band which has the ability to sync are different time perceptions and predictions.

        Should give you an insight that yes, we all agree the rains falls from the sky, but we don't see probably thousands of other elements like the impact upon gravitational field, which other sentient beings on the rock can.

        So, it is true to us that the rain falls, but to another being that sees elements that we cant, the gravitational field may give the impression that the field is going up and the rain isn't visible to them. So the truth for them is that when gravity 'rains' up then the ground gets wet. They have even worked out how it does that but cannot see the water so they know something else is there but they cant detect it. Like us with Dark Matter.

        We think Dark Matter is probability fields awaiting higher rates before they can exist. Maybe not the fields themselves but the same forces that control probably generational at sub-atomic levels, whoever it is that is doing that!? That might be God there.

        No fame wanted, sonny Jims.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          STP

          Im sure he said similar to this in his most intelligent and mind-blowing book The Thief of Time.

          That Dark Matter is the bits of universe behind us or something like that.

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: STP

            That Dark Matter is the bits of universe behind us or something like that.

            Dark Matter is FUN! We have a pretty unified theory of physics, except it can't account for 90%+ of the universe. So call all that missing mass 'dark matter', and try to find it. With so much of it theoretically laying around, that should be easy. Or those theories are just wrong, in which case our universe just got even weirder.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: STP

              Who says dark matter is fun? Have you ever met it? For all we know it might be, well, dark.

              :)

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Who fact checks the fact checkers? How are they funded?

        1. Nifty

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          "Who fact checks the fact checkers? How are they funded?"

          In the UK, by the near-compulsory TV tax.

          Correspondent Marianna Spring was allegedly caught embellishing her CV when applying for a job in 2018. The paper alleges that five years ago Spring wanted to work as a Moscow stringer for the US https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bbc-disinformation-correspondent-accused-of-lying-on-her-cv

          Marianna Spring is the BBC's first disinformation specialist and social media correspondent.

          BBC revenue: Approx £4BN/annum.

          1. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            "Correspondent Marianna Spring was allegedly caught embellishing her CV when applying for a job in 2018. "

            These days you have to "tailor" your resume/cv/job application so it will get through the first level of HR screening put in place to dismiss as many qualified applicants as possible so the company can hire people at a lower salary from overseas.

        2. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          Who fact checks the fact checkers? How are they funded?

          InB4 someone else mentions...

          *I* heard they were funded by Soros and WEF and ClimateScammers!

          (But of course no ;proof beyond an opinion) (which makes tossing the climate / Soros / WEF hand grenade into the conversation even MORE fun)

          see icon

      6. Tom Graham

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Here's some facts:

        Apart from Twitter, social media and most of the US establishment media is controlled by leftists who believe it is right to censor anything who disagrees with them.

        The people who talk about "misinformation" are the biggest liars out there.

        Only liars wish to censor others.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Sure, Jan.

          > Apart from Twitter, social media and most of the US establishment media is controlled by leftists who believe it is right to censor anything who disagrees with them.

          By this, do you mean that Twitter is the exception because *their* guy who believes it is right to censor anyone who agrees with him is a far-right Nazi sympathiser rather than your idea of a "leftist"? :-)

          (And- since it's the only version that fits here- I assume you mean "leftist" in the usual right wing strawman sense to mean "anyone to the left of Ayn Rand and Genghis Khan" or "anyone I disagree with". Or "whaaaaarrrrrgarbl".)

        2. veti Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          Those are not "facts". They're disqualified from the get-go for being both vague and subjective. (What is "social media"? What is "US establishment media"? What is a "leftist", and how exactly do they control Fox News, the Kochs, the Adelson Foundation, Facebook...?)

          What this is, is at best the conclusion of some analysis we can't verify because you're not showing or linking to it. More likely, it's just some opinion that barely even qualifies as half-assed. Either way, to call it "facts" shows either a wanton disregard or ignorance of what "facts" look like.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            So what do we call an opinion that is half-assed? A one-cheek opinion?

            Bored minds may want to know!

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              No matter how half-assed an opinion is, it still always manages to include the asshole.

          2. Mostly Irrelevant

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            They're "alternative facts".

            Which is a euphemism that means lies. You can't debate with a disingenuous party because they'll just keep making things up.

        3. timrowledge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          So just who owns most of the major media outlets? Do please name six that are owned by left-wing billionaire elites. All the ones I ever come across are owned by utter bastard right-wing whackaloons.

          1. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            "bastard right-wing whackaloons."

            I've never heard Murdoch or Soros labeled that way.

            1. collinsl Silver badge

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              Until now.

        4. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Unhappy

          "most of the US establishment media is controlled by leftists"

          Do you know who Rupert Murdoch is and what News Corp owns?

          If you don't you're really too ignorant to be taking part in this conversation.

          1. martinusher Silver badge

            Re: "most of the US establishment media is controlled by leftists"

            Then there's Sinclair -- not the purveyor of weird electronic things from decades ago but a modern media conglomerate. This corporation owns a lot of local TV and radio stations and requires these stations to include right wing OpEd pieces they supply.

            Incidentally, consolidation of media was enabled by deregulation, a Reagan era favorite. Before that there were strict limits on the ownership of media outlets specifically to prevent the monopolization of media by powerful / monied interests.

            1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              Unhappy

              "was enabled by deregulation, a Reagan era favorite. "

              Indeed. Anyone who's seen the film "Vice" will know what a hand Dick Cheney* had in that process.

              Thus paving the way for Faux News and it's collection of 2nd rate imitators.

              When a man who's undermined democracy tells you "This guy is a threat" believe him.

              *I suspect Cheney would argue that the difference between his behaviour and the FOCF's is that his was within the rules of the system, while the FOCF seeks to end any rules for himself. Effectively making himself King Don I, with succession to his beloved children. I'm not sure if his supporters understand this or they do and they rather like the idea. No kiddies, it won't be like King Charles III of England, it's be more like fat Henry VIII, including the beheadings if the FOCF gets his way.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "most of the US establishment media is controlled by leftists"

              > Before that there were strict limits on the ownership of media outlets specifically to prevent the monopolization of media by powerful / monied interests.

              The fact that deregulation let that happen wasn't a bug. It was an entirely intentional feature.

        5. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Pirate

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          Only liars wish to censor others.

          I'd like to add "Grand manipulators" "Evil Dictators" and "Communists" to that list

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            I'd like to add "Grand manipulators" "Evil Dictators" and "Communists" to that list

            Yup. Or just Democrats. First Kerry whined about the way the pesky First Amendment made it harder to govern, now the Blessed Hilary has joined in in an interview with CNN-

            "But we now know that that was an overly simple view, that if the platforms, whether it's Facebook or Twitter/X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don't moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control,"

            Calling for Section 230 protections for platforms removal. Can't have those deplorables accessing information that goes against the will of the Party now, can we? They might learn about Clinton's email server, her mishandling of classified information, the 'Russiagate' hoax she spent so much to create and publish, or just what Bill Clinton got up to during his frequent visits to Epstein Island.

      7. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        pretty much the entire post

        a literalist-extremist or a wokester looking for a nit to pick would probably say...

        [seriously making the guy's point in a lot of ways!]

    2. Jonathon Green
      Coat

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      “ Who judges what is a low-quality news source? It turns out the result holds true when the quality of news was judged by a group composed solely of Republican laypeople and those balanced from a political perspective.”

      So, in this case at least it turns out to be people who are at least nominally sympathetic to the positions of those they judge to be propagating misinformation…

      1. Dimmer Silver badge

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Who judges low quality news sites? Well I do - FOR ME only.

        I change the source every time they are fixated on one subject for hours. If I want their opinion, I will listen. If I want NEWS, give me the facts as you see it and move on to the next thing.

        There is a lot of stuff going on out there and I would like to hear about to determine if it is going to affect me. Something like a hurricane or a dam breaking upstream or even a good story about rescuing a critter, not 24/7 we don’t really know, but we are going to talk about it anyway.

        As long as we have the first amendment, I might get both sides info and be able to make my own decisions.

        1. veti Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          That's a fine and reasonable approach, but it depends on you being able to tell, clearly, what the source of information is. Often on social media that's not the case, because people will just retell or allude to a story without linking to a source published by anyone you've ever heard of. And even if they do link, do you always follow the link, to make sure that the source is what you thought and the story really says what the poster claims it does?

          Retelling and reactions to stories tends to lose layers of meaning and subtlety. That's... okay, it's free speech, but it's also problematic, because now those (unbalanced, sometimes borderline untrue) reports become someone else's baseline, from which they spin a whole new level of exaggeration and baloney, and so it goes on. That's why it's super important for a real news report to identify (1) who said (2) what. And provide links you can follow to verify that (1) really did say (2), and any other context that the report might not have thought important to include. Some channels (e.g. Drudge) are very bad at this, including only a couple of links plus whole paragraphs of what they probably call "context" that's not clearly attributed to anyone, therefore not possible to verify.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            How do you tell fact? That's hard but look for sources that provide evidence and their own sources. Look at action and outcome more than fine words. Be very wary when media are parotting; using the same words, phrases and delivery, that suggests a single driving power. Many media and "leaders" often make assertions which they cannot back up, often illogical if you think through. A classic is CO2 being portrayed as bad. I wonder how many think it would be good to remove all CO2?

            1. LybsterRoy Silver badge

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              -- CO2 being portrayed as bad --

              I wonder if we can ban all those computer models that assert this and are unable to provide verifiable evidence or predictions.

              ps: shouldn't we all be dead now since last year was apparent;y 1.5C higher than whenever?

              1. Robert 22

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                The physics has been known since the 1800s.

                As for the computer models, there is a saying that all models are wrong, but some are useful. We might not get exact predictions, but there are ones that make sense with physical observations and confirm that the physics is real.

                1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  The physics has been known since the 1800s.

                  Ah, this is, once again where people confuse a theory, or hypothesis with fact. So picking on the usual suspect-

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius#Greenhouse_effect

                  Arrhenius estimated based on the CO2 levels at his time, that reducing levels by 0.62–0.55 would decrease temperatures by 4–5 °C (Celsius) and an increase of 2.5 to 3 times of CO2 would cause a temperature rise of 8–9 °C in the Arctic

                  Other scientists like Angstrom and even Einstein disagreed with him, and most importantly, so did reality. Like there hasn't been an 8-9C temperature increase in the Arctic.

                  As for the computer models, there is a saying that all models are wrong, but some are useful. We might not get exact predictions, but there are ones that make sense with physical observations and confirm that the physics is real.

                  Or not. But then this is the problem with climate 'science'. In normal science, a prediction that has been falsified by observation means the prediction is obviously.. false. But this aspect is the trillion dollar question for actual climate science. What is the answer to Arrhenius's question-

                  if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression.

                  Which includes the most dangerous word in the English language, "If". Other parts of his theory have also been falisified, ie the practicality of doubling CO2 and then leading to any potentially dangerous global warming. So we know very roughly how much CO2 we've produced since 1850 and how much CO2 levels have increased. We don't know how much of that is due to natural responses to warming. But based on that, and the assumption that temperature response to CO2 is logarthmic, we know that we've already seen most of the warming for this doubling, and there isn't enough carbon to double CO2 again.

                  And we also know that CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas (GHG). The IPCC assigns it a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of 1. Other GHGs like water vapor or humble H2O have a higher GWP, and we know that CO2 has 4 emission/absorption wavelengths, 3 of which overlap with H2O leaving only a very narrow atmospheric window. Then CO2 dogma (OK, theres some actual physics) assumes that the Sun heats the surface during the day, at night, the surface starts cooling.

                  Part of that cooling will be via radiative transfer, so a teeny amount will be intercepted by CO2 molecules, and almost instantly re-radiated in a random direction. So assume 50% upwards, the rest downwards, and depending on altitude, that 50% might hit another molecule, never hit the surface, or hit a surface like water.. But IR doesn't penetrate water very deeply and as the water would be cooling, that energy would be lost by evaporation, conduction, convection and all those processes that CO2 dogma glosses over.

                  But despite CO2 being very bad at 'trapping heat', it is an extremely good proxy for human activity. So climate charlatans use misinformation to justify spending £22,000,000,000 capturing CO2 and dumping it in a hole in the ground. In the process making gas generation more expensive because CCS makes generation less efficient and more expensive, eg-

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amine_gas_treating

                  MEA and DEA also require a large amount of energy to strip the CO2 during regeneration, which can be up to 70% of total operating costs. They are also more corrosive and chemically unstable compared to other amines.

                  And amines are also toxic. And.. where are we going to get the amines from? So MEA is produced by reacting ethylene oxide with ammonia. Ethylene oxide is extremely flammable, explosive and carcinogenic. Ammonia is also very nasty. And they're both produced from hydrocarbons, which our neo-luddites also want to ban.

                  Which is where misinformation gets very, very expensive. CO2 is so deadly we have to capture and bury it. Because CO2, we've 'invested' billions on windmills. They don't spin all the time, so we've needed more gas turbines. So we've increased dependency on gas, but at the same time, made gas generation more expensive, and we've been banning gas production. And then because our energy is the most expensive in the world, we've been losing far more jobs and causing more misery due to energy poverty than this £22bn make-work scam will ever create.

                  If we invested that £22bn in building a couple of new nuclear plants, we'd produce a few GW of electricity, would need to burn less gas, would produce less CO2 and wouldn't need to try burying that in a hole in the ground. But that would need politicians with a clue, and instead we've got Starmer and Ed Millibrain.

                  1. collinsl Silver badge

                    Re: Who is the judge ?

                    Fundamental failing at the core of your post: energy is never lost, it is merely transferred. Any energy provided into water will heat that water up - in the case of the sea it's an infinitesimal amount for each joule of energy provided, however on a global scale with the number of joules provided it soon adds up.

                    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                      Re: Who is the judge ?

                      Fundamental failing at the core of your post: energy is never lost, it is merely transferred. Any energy provided into water will heat that water up - in the case of the sea it's an infinitesimal amount for each joule of energy provided, however on a global scale with the number of joules provided it soon adds up.

                      Nope. Water would be heated by exactly one joule. There's a handy explanation of the process-

                      https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/how-climate-works/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation

                      This animation is somewhat of a simplification. Molecules are constantly in motion, colliding with other gas molecules and transferring energy from one molecule to another during collisions.

                      Which also shows part of the problem, ie the animation shows a photon travelling downwards, and then continuing downwards. Nothing is 'trapped' by CO2, only delayed for a brief moment. Again the process is pretty simple and the CO2 molecule will emit a photon in a random direction. If that's upwards, the energy is heading back towards space. During the daytime, 50%+ of the energy in the atmospheric window will never reach the surface, then the process is reversed at night time as the surface cools.

                      And then you just need to figure out how much energy is involved, ie W/m^2 in those windows, which you could then convert into joules, should you so choose. And then there are all the other physical processes involved, especially for water given heat/energy loss via conduction, evaporation, convection etc. You could try a simple experiment like trying to heat water using an IR heat lamp outdoors. Especially if there's anything more than a light breeze. Easy enough to set up with a thermometer measuring the water temperature and the energy used by the heat lamp. And for bonus points, you could try adding some CO2 and seeing how much additional heat that will 'trap'.

                      Or you could just look at projects like OCO (Orbiting Carbon Observatory) that use spectrometers and notch filters to detect CO2 by its emission spectrum.. Which it can do because obviously CO2 is radiating most of it's energy back to space. Or projects like 'Earthshine' that look at the way the Earth is getting 'brighter'. Or just wonder why, despite CO2 being the trillion dollar profit engine, we're still relying on thermometers at airports as crude proxies for measuring and quantifying the effects of CO2. Or because 'Global Warming' is mostly a nocturnal beast, why propagandists like the UK Met Office isn't trumpeting increases in Tmin, or minimum temperatures. Instead, they measure jet exhaust and claim that as 'proof' of 'Global Warming'.

            2. demon driver

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              Excellent example of trying to push an un- and anti-scientific conspiracy theory by rhetorically distorting a complex fact through one of the stupidest possible oversimplifications, while mixing scientific facts up with what some do "portay" or "think". I don't know who's "portraying" "CO2" (as such) "as bad" and I don't care too much, either – it's still a fact that producing substantially more than what is necessary to keep up the ecology in the lower troposhpere is indeed "bad", and nitpicking on some who may have been abbreviating that too much doesn't help anyone.

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                it's still a fact that producing substantially more than what is necessary to keep up the ecology in the lower troposhpere is indeed "bad", and nitpicking on some who may have been abbreviating that too much doesn't help anyone.

                No, it really isn't a 'fact' at all. It's a theory, and a theory that is and has been regularly falsified. But misinformation is extremely lucrative, eg-

                https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4301n3771o

                The government has pledged nearly £22bn for projects to capture and store carbon emissions from energy, industry and hydrogen production.

                This must be what Starmer his band of useful idiots meant by the £22bn 'black hole' in UK finances because this 'project' will attempt to take CO2 and dump it into a hole in the ground. Utterly futile because it will have no effect on the climate or weather. And guess who will be paying that £22bn? And paying dearly because our energy is already the worlds most expensive.

                But the 'fact' is CO2 is actually good-

                https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/goddard/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth-study-finds/

                From a quarter to half of Earth’s vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25.

                This is a good thing, no? Greenhouse farmers already knew this because they pump terrifying levels of CO2 into greenhouses. Not to warm them, but to increase crop yields. In fact the CO2 makes no measurable difference to greenhouse temperatures. The IPCC also agrees that increased CO2 and temperature can be a good thing.. Except where it gets to their 'Summary for Policy Makers', and idiots like Ed Millibrain seize on it to waste billions. There is no observable correlation between CO2 and temperature, other than CO2 levels increasing following warming, which is entirely normal for our biosphere.

                But politicians ignore the science, and waste £22bn on something that produces nothing and would be much better spent on new, 'Green' nuclear power instead.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  This scientific expertise brought to you by the same person whose take on dark matter is the same old "they just called it dark matter to cover up the fact they can't find 90% of the universe".

                  It's funny how even apparently non-political things like dark matter get turned into an anti-elite/anti-intellectual conspiracy by right-winger supporters of the US culture wars. Yeah, those scientists are all corrupt and trying to cover up the fact they know nothing, unlike you, right?

                  Must feel great to tell yourself you're a smart, independent thinker, who sees through that sort of thing. Even though in truth you come across as an almost entirely straight mirror of imported culture war talking points, right down to the fact that even someone from Britain like you ends up defining your "own" politics almost entirely in terms of another country's society and political system (i.e. the US).

                  And the saddest thing is I don't even think, as many do, that you're a propagandist. I think you're for real.

                  1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                    Re: Who is the judge ?

                    And the saddest thing is I don't even think, as many do, that you're a propagandist. I think you're for real.

                    I think the saddest thing is the way you've expended so much energy and wasted so many key strokes on lil'ol me.. Anonymously, of course.

                    So that dark matter. Any idea where it might be? In between your earlobes and preventing your skull from imploding? But obviously this can't be an 'anti-intellectual' posting..

                    1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                    Unhappy

                    "Must feel great to tell yourself you're a smart, independent thinker, ..

                    ..who sees through that sort of thing. "

                    That's pretty much the conclusion of studies on conspiracy thinking.

                    Voltaire's warning remains relevant. "If you can make people believe fantasies, you can make them commit atrocities."

                2. Random person

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  You may find this episode on CO2 and greening enlightening https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0jgzxpk

                  Transcript here https://app.podscribe.ai/episode/107946878

                  From the transcript

                  > It's also true that more photosynthesis means more carbon is being taken outta the atmosphere and locked away in plants a process which helps lower the carbon in the atmosphere and slightly offset manmade emissions.

                  >

                  > Of course, they can offset a little bit, but they cannot overturn, for example, the human emissions of the CO2. In the atmosphere.

                  I haven't fixed the transcript.

                  1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                    Re: Who is the judge ?

                    Of course, they can offset a little bit, but they cannot overturn, for example, the human emissions of the CO2. In the atmosphere.

                    I haven't fixed the transcript.

                    The fix was in at your source. But a few questions-

                    1) Do you know the total amount of CO2 emitted by natural sources?

                    2) Do you know the total amount emttied by humans?

                    3) Do you know the uncertainties for both?

                    Then if you have a scientific calculator, and assuming the increase in CO2 since say, 1850, you could work out a quick cost/benefit analysis of spending £22bn to reduce UK emissions by 8.5mt a year. Assuming CCS can be made to work, which nobody in the world has managed to do on an industrial scale, yet.

                    But if you can manage to find answers to those, you could try looking for a thermometer that would allow you to measure what success looks like. I'll give you a hint here, estimated CO2 sensitivity is around 1.2C per doubling, it's assumed to be logarithmic, so we've already had all the warming CO2 is ever likely to give us. An easier question to answer is around 'Green jobs' though-

                    The government said the move would give industry confidence to invest in the UK, attracting £8bn of private investment, directly creating 4,000 jobs and supporting 50,000 in the long term.

                    So £22bn to create 4,000 jobs.. That's only £5.5m per job. Or being generous and assuming another £8bn is 'invested', only £600,000 per job. But then Starmer has already shown that he's very good at spending other peoples money.

                    1. MachDiamond Silver badge

                      Re: Who is the judge ?

                      "Assuming CCS can be made to work, which nobody in the world has managed to do on an industrial scale, yet."

                      It has been done at one coal-fired power plant in the US. It's twitchy, expensive and mainly about sweeping the CO2 "under the rug"

                      Many proposals call for pumping CO2 emissions down depleted wells. That has led to a couple of cases of improper well plugs being shot out and the CO2 vented. In a place with natural faults, a leak could come about due to an earthquake. Just sequestering CO2 is fraught with problems and any accidents on a large scale could be "really bad".

                      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                        Unhappy

                        It has been done at one coal-fired power plant in the US

                        You missed the project in California pumping it into the sea to make the raw material for concrete.

                        A bit elaborate but given how much concrete the world uses quite a good application for it.

                        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                          Re: It has been done at one coal-fired power plant in the US

                          A bit elaborate but given how much concrete the world uses quite a good application for it.

                          How much does the concrete it produces cost, and how much energy does that take? But concrete is fun given it absorbs CO2 anyway. So just concrete over the Amazon and we'd greatly reduce CO2 and methane emmissions, and capture CO2 as well.

                          And then we'd probably all die.

                          But if you're interested, this is a good read-

                          https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41247-020-00080-5#Abs1

                          Assessing Carbon Capture: Public Policy, Science, and Societal Need

                          ...The output amount we standardized for is 1 GtCO2 removal per year. We examined energy and land requirements at that level of capture. We found that the literature regularly discusses the massive energy usage of DAC. For example, just 1 Gt removal could consume a quantity of energy approaching the total electricity generation for the US in 2017.

                          And it also found-

                          In 2020, a federal investigation found that claimants for the 4Q tax credit failed to document successful geological storage for nearly $900 million of the $1 billion they had claimed.

                          Which is typical of the Green con jobs. And again all because misinformation has convinced gullible politicians to give them our money. Who says you can't tax thin air, and make an awful lot of money in the process for something that won't produce any measurable temperature result.

                          Great! Make it so! Then err.. what about all the energy we need to power AI bitbarns that might just tell us that CCS is a really stupid idea. Plus as that paper points out, the main customer for CO2 is the oil and gas industry for enhanced recovery. Or they just get paid £80+ a tonne to store CO2 in depleted gas fields that are otherwise worthless.

                3. demon driver

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  "This is a good thing, no?"

                  No. Only when seen isolated.

                  "Greenhouse farmers already knew this because they pump terrifying levels of CO2 into greenhouses."

                  HAHAHA! Because what's good locally must also be good globally. Thank you for this brilliant example of the quality of deniers' arguments. Everybody move on, nothing to see here.

                  1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                    Re: Who is the judge ?

                    HAHAHA! Because what's good locally must also be good globally. Thank you for this brilliant example of the quality of deniers' arguments. Everybody move on, nothing to see here.

                    Yep. At least I have arguments. The UK will bet £22bn on some bad arguments. This is your money that will be spent, which will almost certainly be added to our energy bills again. And all it will do is allow Ed Milliband to meet a target he had written for him by a lobbyist, who then was made a Baroness.

                    What it won't do is have any measurable effect on temperatures, or probably even work. But Labour is 'saving the planet'. But it's an analogy. The 'biggest threat' facing humanity is the Greenhouse Effect. Not the ever rising cost of living due to energy costs, or job losses due to the same. Except we don't live in a greenhouse, we live on a planet that's open to space. We do have actual greenhouses that use far higher levels of CO2 to increase crop yields. The temperature effect can't be measured. Neither will the temperature effect from pouring £22bn of our money down a hole.

                    And of course anyone who dares to disagree with the consensus is branded a 'denier' by people who don't actually understand the science. This is just politics, and of course if people realise that £22bn will simply be wasted, then the people who want that £22bn might not get it. It's simple regulatory capture, or a long con. And it's very much about misinformation. John Kerry's quote about how the First Amendment making it hard to govern came from a speech he was giving at a climate conference. The last thing the climate grifters want is for people to learn the truth, they just want our money.

                  2. MachDiamond Silver badge

                    Re: Who is the judge ?

                    ""Greenhouse farmers already knew this because they pump terrifying levels of CO2 into greenhouses.""

                    In a closed/semi-closed greenhouse, it's a good tactic since the plants might do well with the increase and the bugs, not so much. In the wider world, we need insects.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                Go ask the man on the street if we should remove all CO2. Ask them how much atmosphere is CO2. Ask them how current levels compare across the history of mammalian life. Ask them what and when was the minimum and maximum. Ask them at what level does plant life die off.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Who is the judge ?

                  If they think we ought to remove all CO2 they ARE plant life..

                  :)

            3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              FAIL

              "A classic is CO2 being portrayed as bad. "

              A variation of a line Bush Jnr* had.

              Ever seen the film "Apollo 13"? It explains quite well what happens when people are in a box with no way to remove the CO2 from the air.

              Basically continuous panting for air (CO2 is what really stimulates your breathing reflex), massive headaches, "brain fog" and eventually unconsciousness and death. Normal human beings would consider those quite "bad."

              And we haven't got onto it's ability to trap re-emitted ground radiation and pump more energy into the global weather machine, resulting in more extreme weather events (Blizzards in Texas WTF?). And how many once-in-a-century hurricanes have visited the US in the last 24 years? Care to hazard a guess how many were expected?

              It's not left-wing bias that gets posts by MAGA types deleted and accounts banned. It's their insanity

              *Or "Shrub" as liked to think of him.

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: "A classic is CO2 being portrayed as bad. "

                Ever seen the film "Apollo 13"? It explains quite well what happens when people are in a box with no way to remove the CO2 from the air.

                Surely they should have melted first? Or as an infamous reality denier, Paul Erlich once wrote in his best seller "The Population Bomb", be turned into blue steam. Can you think of any physical or biological process that would allow this?

                Basically continuous panting for air (CO2 is what really stimulates your breathing reflex), massive headaches, "brain fog" and eventually unconsciousness and death.

                Yep. Any idea what levels this occurs at? Any idea what levels are permissable or recommended for buildings and workplaces? Any idea what levels are used in those TV experiments with cameras, candles and containers full of CO2 to demonstrate the terrifying power of CO2? And if CO2 is so good at 'trapping heat', why don't we use it to warm buildings and save on heating costs?

                And we haven't got onto it's ability to trap re-emitted ground radiation and pump more energy into the global weather machine, resulting in more extreme weather events (Blizzards in Texas WTF?). And how many once-in-a-century hurricanes have visited the US in the last 24 years? Care to hazard a guess how many were expected?

                And there you demonstrate the normal Gish-Gallop of chaining together a bunch of semi-related factoids, creating spurious correlations and mixing up cause and effect. CO2 has been increasing, therefore it must be the cause, and the solution will cost you >£22bn so scammers can try to bury it in a hole in the ground.

                This-

                https://www.ourstate.com/flood-of-1916/

                The flood of 1916 broke every record in the book. The death and destruction it caused in Western North Carolina defined flooding for an entire generation of survivors, and their stories live on nearly 100 years later.

                Can't have happened, and must be AI-generated 'fake news' or 'misinformation' because 'extreme weather' is caused by CO2, and CO2 levels were lower in the past.. right? And these didn't happen either-

                https://www.loc.gov/item/2021669942/

                This image shows the devastation caused by the Great Hurricane of 1896 that struck the Gulf and Atlantic coasts of Florida. With its 2,200-kilometer coastline, Florida is the U.S. state most vulnerable to these storms. More than 450 recorded tropical storms and hurricanes have reached its shores since European exploration began. The hurricane of September 1896 destroyed most of the residential area of the town of Cedar Key on the upper west coast of the Florida peninsula, killing dozens of residents and destroying most of Cedar Key's industries...

                ... Other famous storms in Florida history include the Okeechobee Hurricane of 1928 and the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935

                Those must have been 'fake news' and 'misinformation' as well, huh?

                Or this-

                https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/index.php?arch&loc=global

                Shows no increased trends in 'extreme weather'. Or perhaps you'd believe this bunch of climate 'deniers'?-

                https://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/global-warming-and-hurricanes/

                There is no strong evidence of century-scale increasing trends in U.S. landfalling hurricanes or major hurricanes. Similarly for Atlantic basin-wide hurricane frequency (after adjusting for changing observing capabilities over time), there is not strong evidence for an increase since the late 1800s in hurricanes, major hurricanes, or the proportion of hurricanes that reach major hurricane intensity.

                And yet you believe this to be true, despite the lack of evidence and complete lack of correlation with CO2.

                It's not left-wing bias that gets posts by MAGA types deleted and accounts banned. It's their insanity

                You seem to be the one who believes in imaginary things, so in a classic example of projection, perhaps it's not me, it's you who should be questioning their sanity. Or the sanity, or motivations of the charlatans who've convinced you that 'misinformation' is truth. But then Charles Mackay wrote about this as well. Eat tulip bulbs and be happy or something..

                1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                  FAIL

                  "Surely they should have melted first? "

                  have you not seen the film, or are you really just this ignorant?

                  I really can't decide. You play both sooo convincingly.

                  Since you can't seem to use Google either to google "danger levels for CO2 concentration" I'll spoon feed you the answer, like your opinions. The answer is here

                  And in case you were wondering the pre-industrial level was around 290-290ppm.

                  I think I'll just leave you there as wasting any more of time with your ongoing mix of assertions and general bu***hit is literally a waste of my time. And there's a very simple way to communicate with you that I'll be using with you from now on.

                  1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                    Re: "Surely they should have melted first? "

                    have you not seen the film, or are you really just this ignorant?

                    Again with the projection. I've seen the film, I simply question the relevance in something that's drifted from CO2 being a good thing for food production to your Gish-Gallop of reality denial.

                    Since you can't seem to use Google either to google "danger levels for CO2 concentration" I'll spoon feed you the answer, like your opinions.

                    No need, I know. Although I often prefer to use the example for safe levels inside submarines, those being a rather closed environment. Just like our (or at least my) Earth isn't. So Greenhouses, buildings, submarines where say, 5000ppmv CO2 has no measurable temperature effect. Then the Earth, which isn't a closed environment and yet is somehow responsible for say, 1.5C warming with an increase of only 200ppmv.

                    And in case you were wondering the pre-industrial level was around 290-290ppm.

                    Oh, I am wondering. Charles Keeling was only born in 1928 and didn't start collecting CO2 measurements until 1958, and used different methods to the ones used in a very short time series from Kew Gardens in 1898. And very different again from CO2 extracted from ice cores. Those being especially incovenient given they generally show CO2 levels rising following warming. But such is the magical power of CO2. Effect can precede cause, it warms, it cools, it makes the wind blow and the rains fall.

                    And, of course it makes £22bn for scammers to pump CO2 into the ground, and convinces people who think like you to throw soup at paintings.

                    And there's a very simple way to communicate with you that I'll be using with you from now on.

                    Come up with catchy terms like 'FOCF'? But of course you're also rather misinformed about that as well given Trump isn't yet a convicted felon. But I thank you once again for demonstrating the power of misinformation, and people's unwillingness to fix that problem by becoming informed. Hardly surprising that Kerry, along with many politicians want to prevent the spread of information to counter misinformaation. You're so much easier to govern and manage when you remain ignorant.

                2. Casca Silver badge

                  Re: "A classic is CO2 being portrayed as bad. "

                  You seem to be the one who believes in imaginary things, so in a classic example of projection, perhaps it's not me,

                  Its you...

                  The human who believe everything kreml releases and posts here. The defender of trump in every article.

        2. MachDiamond Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          "As long as we have the first amendment, I might get both sides info and be able to make my own decisions."

          Enjoy it while you can. Operatives such as John Kerry see the First Amendment as a big impediment to the sort of society the politicians want to create.

    3. DS999 Silver badge

      I figured this would trigger

      The type of people who spread all the lies.

      1. Casca Silver badge

        Re: I figured this would trigger

        They really are predictable

        1. ecofeco Silver badge

          Re: I figured this would trigger

          And clueless that they ARE so predictable.

    4. jake Silver badge

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      Each of us is the judge.

      Lies are lies. Are you supporting liars?

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      Your first sentence is great.

      "Every time that the word "misinformation" is deployed one should immediately ask oneself, who is the Judge ?"

      Perfect even. Who is the judge? Who decides what is misinformation and what isn't?

      That would actually be me. I have an analytical mind and can reference multiple sources and even apply common sense before determining if something is true or not. I'm not saying I'm in a minority or anything like that because I'm nothing special. The thing is though there are a lot of people in this world that just don't care. It's not that they are of lesser intelligence or anything like that. They just don't give a shit really so it's important those people are presented with information that is true.

      Having said that I will be the first one to tell you the main stream media is absolute dogshit funded by billionaires to protect rich people. However, misinformation regardless of political side does need to be removed. Here's an important question for you.

      Tell me of a single piece of misinformation that was removed that has been proven to not be misinformation. Left or right, take your pick.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        "Tell me of a single piece of misinformation that was removed that has been proven to not be misinformation. Left or right, take your pick."

        Hunter's laptop. Though it didn't show wrongdoing on his father's part, the mere mention was labelled as "misinformation".

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          It wasn't the mere mention of the laptop that caused the posts to get pulled.

          It was the bullshit that was being posted about it and its contents that got the posts pulled.

          The fact is that laptop is useless as a point of argument, for the simple reason that literally ANYTHING could have been planted on it between the time that Biden dropped it off for repair and the time that the FBI somehow managed to get their mitts on it. This broken chain of custody makes the contents inadmissible as evidence either for or against Biden in any court of law in the US (despite what the Klown Kourt in Kongress has been trying to sell for the last couple of years).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Who is the judge ?

            Please don't spread misinformation through deceptive conjecture, the FBI confirmed a lack of tampering.

            After being handed the device by a Wilmington, Del., computer shop owner in 2019, the FBI quickly concluded by examining computer data as well as Hunter Biden’s phone records that the laptop was genuinely his and did not seem to have been tampered with or manipulated.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/23/hunter-biden-laptop-whistleblowers/#selection-707.0-707.268

            Your argument isn't terribly convincing in any case; by the same standard, the Pentagon Papers or anything else involving leaked information would have been censored as 'misinformation' because the chain of custody was broken.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Who is the judge ?

              "did not seem to have been tampered with or manipulated"

              "Did not seem to have been" is not the same as "was not."

              I don't think you quite understand what misinformation is. Misinformation is lies spread for a specific purpose which is mostly politically motivated though it can be used to discredit a person or business.

              Leaked government information doesn't have a specific purpose or target. If it was misinformation the government or whoever it was who was the target could disprove it. If they can't disprove it then and it can't be proven it falls into the category of hearsay. In your example there is absolutely no way to unequivocally prove the laptop had not been tampered with. The drive could easily have been removed, altered and then put back. There would be absolutely no way to trace it. You could point to bit locker or other encryption however every single repair shop will ask for the keys otherwise how do they fix it?

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Who is the judge ?

                You're burying the lede. The question of tampering is secondary to the use of threats by law enforcement to curtail the sharing of politically embarrassing information.

                Your assertions about leaked government information are naive and not supported by history. Nixon and Clinton both lied prodigiously and repeatedly over a prolonged period of time during their respective scandals. Would you trust either of them to not use a tool which silently disappears sharing of reports from social media?

                This is McCarthyism all over again. Both the Soviets and their equally villainous successors do fund actual misinformation campaigns but trusting officials with the powers of broad censorship in response empowers despotism on our side far more than it helps fight the Reds.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          The are safe and effective ...

    6. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      "Every time that the word "misinformation" is deployed one should immediately ask oneself, who is the Judge ?"

      If you'd bothered to actually read the article instead of rushing to be first to post, you might have noticed that "low quality news sources" was defined and agreed to by "panels" including one made up solely of Republicans, indicating that they really were "low quality news sources". It seems the researchers did all they possibly could to remove any personal bias from this.

      1. SundogUK Silver badge

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        "Republicans" as defined by the undeniably left wing media. RINO's in other words.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          "Republicans" as defined by the undeniably left wing media. RINO's in other words.

          I hereby define any post that does not agree with my viewpoint as PINOs, Persons In Name Only, actually bots with nefarious intent, and will delete those posts. Ooooh, problem solved!

    7. BonezOz

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      When the conservatives continually push obviously AI generated images of their preferred political leader in "heroic" acts, such as fixing a mobile phone tower on their own, or wading through flood waters after a natural disaster, or endorsements from celebrities that haven't actually endorsed anything, it stands to reason that those images, and the information that they collude to are heavily moderated.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Free speech only for me because I am the only qualified arbiter.

    8. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      You are absolutely correct. I think it's too late, there has been a psyop that has brainwashed people. Back in the day people used to laugh at "I read it in the papers". Now they seem to believe everything the media tells them. I note how many alternative media actually provide sources and evidence. Unfortunately, this makes them boring to many. Look at the replies you had - most are cross because you don't believe the narrative. One person even purposefully misread your comments about the subjectivity of truth in order to take exception.

      I'm afraid it is too late to avoid disaster, I just hope it will not be total and we don't lose all the great things we built up over the last couple of centuries. The useful idiots probably wont even recognise why it happened after they go through it, which condems us to repeat in another century or two.

      1. demon driver

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        But isn't everything by default true that's in the media? Recently, even a former president of the US prominently stated "I've seen it [being reported] on TV" as the irrefutable proof for a claim that just had been refuted by fact checking with officials of the place where it was claimed to have happened.

        1. dangerous race

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          That was so funny! Watching Harris trigger Trump in to saying that was absolutely fantastic. It's my new 'ringtone' :-)

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc1W_Pys88U

          SFW

        2. Robert 22

          Re: Who is the judge ?

          That president gets his news from Fox News and other right wing media.

    9. ariels-again

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      You could, you know, read the article before responding. The paper explains how they decided that a new source is low quality.

      Obviously source quality does not matter with people who refuse to read.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        I fear that comprehensive and analytical reading has become a lost art.

    10. call-me-mark
      Facepalm

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      > Since most of the media is controlled by the left

      Obviously! Look who actually owns the media: Murdoch, Zuckerberg, Musk, etc etc ad nauseam. Lefties to a man.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Yeah "left" and "right" are not good terms. Almost reversed. Neo-feudalist elite and Libertarian capitalists may be more accurate. Zucks et al are just trying to cement their positions in the NWO.

    11. localzuk

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      Interesting that you talk about misinformation and then include it in your post...

      "Since most of the media is controlled by the left"? Really?

      Fox News? Sinclair? News Corp? Breitbart? Daily Mail? New York Post? Newsmax? OAN? Wall Street Journal? Washington Times? National Review? Epoch Times?

      The idea that "most" is left wing is misinformation. There is an even spread across the spectrum.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        > The idea that "most" is left wing is misinformation.

        This is a lie that's been repeated ad nauseam not just in recent years, but for several decades. If you repeat this obvious shite often enough, some people start to believe- and repeat- it.

    12. This post has been deleted by its author

    13. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      FAIL

      " most of the media is controlled by the left "

      Are you f**king kidding me?

      2 words.

      Rupert Murdoch.

    14. Geezheeztall
      Trollface

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      Seems there's many social media moderators reacting negatively in this thread.

    15. Marty McFly Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      For the original poster... Fair comment, no attacks, clearly stating an opinion, and drawing a possible conclusion based on logical progression. Disappointing to see the number of down votes.

      As for who is the judge.... ME!

      It is my responsibility to judge the information provided against my personal life experiences to determine what I consider the truth or not. No one else has the responsibility to determine, for me, what the truth it. Not the government, and sure as heck not the media.

    16. ecofeco Silver badge

      Re: Who is the judge ?

      Facts determine. Perhaps aquatint yourselves with this. Or don't. Facts don't care about your opinions. Or winning your Darwin Award for ignoring facts.

      1. ecofeco Silver badge

        Re: Who is the judge ?

        Arrgh damn typo. Sorry. Not feeling well yesterday.

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

  3. _Elvi_

    Ever wonder how...

    .. the modern "Bible" evolved into what it is today?

    I wonder what offerings like "X" will evolve into..

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Ever wonder how...

      Actually, the bible itself has remained remarkably consistent with fragments from antiquity (pace spelling and translation errors, which are well known to scholars, if not the clergy ... ).

      It's the interpretation and interpolation of the meaning contained within it that has become perverted over time.

      1. veti Silver badge

        Re: Ever wonder how...

        "Perverted" is a very loaded word, it presupposes that there's an original, coherent "correct" interpretation.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Ever wonder how...

          ""Perverted" is a very loaded word,"

          Especially when the people you are talking to have never picked up a dictionary.

          "it presupposes that there's an original, coherent "correct" interpretation."

          Presumably the people who dictated the words to the scribes who wrote them down had very specific meanings for each of the conglomeration of parts we now know as "the bible". If not, are you suggesting the entire collection has always been a bunch of meaningless drivel?

          If you subscribe to the "inerrant word of god" theory, I'll bow out right now ... I don't have time for that shit.

          1. veti Silver badge

            Re: Ever wonder how...

            That "presumably" is doing a lot of lifting there. What makes you think there were scribes and dictation involved in the original writing? Or assume that the people doing it had taken the time to marshal their own thoughts and check their own stories for coherence?

            Much of the Bible seems to me to have been written by people in a state of considerable excitement and agitation. Small wonder if it sometimes doesn't seem to make much sense.

            1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              Coat

              "What makes you think there were scribes and dictation involved in the original writing?"

              A quick google search suggests literacy rates in Roman times were in the 15-20% range.

              This page talks about their employment..

              Matthew, being a Tax Collector probably could, some were fisherman (but one is described as employing staff so maybe, maybe not.

              Simon is described as "The Zealot." Do you need literacy for that? I didn't know you could do that as a career. Several don't have a job listed.

              So yes I think it's pretty likely that a fair bit of this was dictated by some of them, possibly to others of the group, possibly to professional scribes.

              BTW IIRC the transcriptions took place 30-40 years after the events. IIRC the version of The Bible we read today was licked into shape around the 3rd century AD. IOW 300 years after the events being described. So nothing from Mary Magdalene and nothing from Jesus three brothers* who, you might think, would have a few comments about growing up with the Son of God. But apparently nothing worth reading. :-( . And when did the Judas Gospel get written? Presumably between his handover to the priests and hearing of the crucifixion, at which point Judas decides to deal with himself in "the only language they understand"

              * Not being a hard-core God-bother finding out he has 3 bros was a real why-did-I-not-know-this moment.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ever wonder how...

        Correct. Which is why learning to read and printing were game changers. The clergy wanted to be the gateway to god.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Ever wonder how...

      The Bible contains, murder, rape, incest, liars, genocide, slavery, live executions and so on.

      Much like the internet really. Maybe the bible didn't evolve and the internet copies the bible.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ever wonder how...

        Maybe both derive from human behaviour...

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Ever wonder how...

          Exactly.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ever wonder how...

        Both written by people.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ever wonder how...

        The Bible contains, murder, rape, incest, liars, genocide, slavery, live executions and so on.

        Presumably only after they'd found executing the dead was rather less satisfying.

        The whole thing is a crock. If it weren't then I'd be OK to keep slaves, and to have sex with them. Unless I was planning on selling the slave, in which case I'd have to take a male sheep to the front of a tent to be sacrificed, as per Leviticus 19:20-22.

    3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      "I wonder what offerings like "X" will evolve into.."

      "Evolution" implies (by some measure) getting better at something.

      So far under Musk the only thing it seems to be getting better at is spreading bu***hit and lies.

      Meanwhile it's estimate that it's now worth about 20% what Musk (and his banks) paid for it.

      Way to go Elon.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: "I wonder what offerings like "X" will evolve into.."

        ""Evolution" implies (by some measure) getting better at something."

        It's a bit more subtle than that. Evolution is adapting to the environment by progressively changing. The downside is that over-adaptation can lead to extinction if the environment changes too much or too rapidly. Humans have gone beyond physically adapting to shaping our environments to suit us (buildings, HVAC, etc). Is that getting better? In a way, yes. In another way, it's being put to more risk. I see evolution as being akin to a lighting bolt that "feels" it's way from the clouds to the Earth. Lots of branches go nowhere.

  4. jake Silver badge

    They don't "go after" conservatives, per se.

    Rather, they go after the posts of people who break the rules of the forum in question.

    If the bulk of those rule breakers are "conservative" it is hardly the fault of the moderator.

    And if a specific person continues to break the rules, they are removed from the forum ... NOT because they are "conservative", but rather because they are taking up too much time (money) on the part of the company hosting the forum.

    Remember, the freedom of the press belongs to he who owns one. You are not allowed to use my presses without my permission.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They don't "go after" conservatives, per se.

      Most of the media forums are policied by "on-narrative" left. (I hate left and right, meaning has changed so much)

    2. localzuk

      Re: They don't "go after" conservatives, per se.

      Exactly. Its similar with police - the people who end up in prison are often from specific demographic groups - disadvantaged backgrounds etc... The police aren't purposefully targeting them because of the background (well, most police aren't). They're targeting them because they target criminals.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: They don't "go after" conservatives, per se.

        That's the theory, but things like being arrested for what amounts to "driving while black" shows it's sadly not as black and white (sorry) as it ought to be.

    3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      "You are not allowed to use my presses without my permission."

      Got it in one. "Freedom of speech" ain't free.

      When the FOCF was barred from Twitter it wasn't his "Freedom of speech," that was stopped. He broke their T&C's.

      He was still completely free to spout whatever load of s**t popped into whatever he's using for a brain.

      That is his right in a free society.

      It was their right not to allow him to say it to 65 million people at the same time.

      Apparently this concept is a bit hard for MAGA types to grasp. TL:DR. There's a lot of stupid out there.

  5. fg_swe Silver badge

    Oligarchy Media Corruption

    "high value media" means it is financed and corrupted by oligarchs. Soros, Gates and the like. They peddle their half baked medical products and their marxist ideas by these channels.

    Facts such as CDC VAERS are getting suppressed, because these financiers demand that.

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

      So-called "high value media" has nothing to do with money.

      High value media is media which provides high value content.

      ElReg is high value media. The National Inquirer, not so much.

      "Facts such as CDC VAERS are getting suppressed"

      No, I don't think so ... nobody is suppressing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It's still there, right where it always was. Perhaps you should stop getting your information from <that> side of youtube? Rots the brain, it does.

      1. Dimmer Silver badge

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        “ ElReg is high value media”

        I agree, but maybe for a different reason.

        I look to the article to stimulate conversation in the comments.

        I have found so many solutions from those that post constructive and useful info.

        VMware- Broadcom

        Hacking

        Windows update failures

        BoFH

        Tools

        Trends

        This and may more articles and comments (solutions) make this a HIGH value news source.

      2. call-me-mark

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        Is that the same CDC VAERS that included a report from James Laidler that a vaccine turned him into The Hulk?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

      Marxist? You have no idea what that means.

      Soros? Tell me how he's influenced anything like the Coch Brothers, Peter Tiel, or Murdoch?

      "Half baked medical products" - Really? really? This from the virus denying, science denying side full of grifters like Alex Jones etc.

      CDC VAERS - A database that right wing idiots used to "prove" anecdotal tales were prove of some huge conspiracy. Face it, the right are too stupid to understand the purpose of VAERS. They were cautioned against using it the way they did, but it was never censored. It's still there.

      Are you like a human equivalent of "The Onion"?

      1. Alistair
        Windows

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        @AC

        Are you like a human equivalent of "The Onion"?

        Very clearly this one is NOT like The Onion. The Onion is definitely in the category of high value media, as it tends to take the piss out of those that are too full of themselves, or shit, or sometimes both, with a fairly outrageous sense of humour. Very much unlike the one you target, that one, clearly, has no sense of humour.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

          :-) You're right, of course. My apologies to The Onion!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        Make sure you get your shots! Completely safe and effective, more Covid, MPOX, Flu, self replicating mRNA go on, gets lots they are there to make you well .... Marburg shots coming soon, roll up, roll up.

        1. localzuk

          Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

          Sure. I'm fully vaccinated for a variety of things. You know what it has done? Stopped me dying from smallpox. From getting measles. From getting mumps. From dying from Covid. You know what it hasn't done? Hurt me.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

            Indeed. Got the latest Covid shot a few days ago (for me that was no 5 due to the work I do), and I have the flu jab already in the fridge (injections start at the end of the month).

            I'm fully prepared to believe that some do feel an impact, but I have had absolutely zero issues. Can recommend, 5 out of 5 :).

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        more like babylon bee, weird and soo bad at humor, I actually pity them!

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

      Interesting that you have so many down votes when the truth is available. They will die in ignorance before necessary, unfortunately taken most of us with them!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

        Oh yes, please feel free to keep at a distance. You're not the sort I'd want to be close anyway, God alone knows what you may carry.

        At a minimum I'd recommend a broad spectrum antibiotic :).

    4. localzuk

      Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

      Its funny you roll out Soros and Gates... But ignore the multitude of right-wing people such as Koch, Theil, Mercer etc...?

    5. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      fg_swe

      joined 20 Nov 2021

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: fg_swe

        That particular entity started posting (as AC) at least as early as May of 2009.

        It had a different name (for one day) in October of 2015.

        1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: fg_swe

          I stand corrected.

          Your search skills are formidable.

    6. Casca Silver badge

      Re: Oligarchy Media Corruption

      Wow, not one thing right in that post...

  6. fg_swe Silver badge

    Bribe

    https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/gates-stiftung-unterstuetzt-den-spiegel-mit-weiteren-29-millionen-dollar-li.194183

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Bribe

      Do you have any thoughts of your own to contribute? Or are you content with parroting the thoughts of others?

    2. veti Silver badge

      Re: Bribe

      Are you saying there's something wrong with a private foundation publicly announcing that it's giving money to a news source?

      Out of interest, where do you stand on private individuals outright buying entire media channels, such as Twitter?

      1. Casca Silver badge

        Re: Bribe

        Oh, according to him its not the same because twitter was bought by a person with the right agenda...

  7. scrubber
    Headmaster

    Musk Ambition

    Musk claimed to be for free speech as far as the law allows and misinformation happens to be protected speech under the US 1st Amendment.

    If you want to disagree with how the algorithm promotes such speech then I might be more on your side.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Musk Ambition

      Musk censors stuff that is critical of him, and stuff he doesn't agree with. He even marks the word "CIS" as a slur.

      By the way, the constitution isn't some godlike document that can never be wrong.

      The clue is in the meaning of the word "amendments".

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Musk Ambition

        It's always least worst choice. I.e., Musk, RFK, Trump I don't agree with everything the purport to, but a hell of a lot better for the world than Biden, Harris, Walz. How did it come to be that the right want to stop wars and the left escalate them?

        1. GenericLeftieWhackjob

          Re: Musk Ambition

          What do you call the proposals here? Maybe some cute term like "special military operation"?

          https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/03/us/politics/trump-mexico-cartels-republican.html

          https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-if-elected-again-he-will-send-troops-us-mexico-border-2023-09-20/

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: Musk Ambition

            What do you call the proposals here? Maybe some cute term like "special military operation"?

            A solution to dealing with Biden and Harris's open borders policy?

            1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

              Re: Musk Ambition

              Oh grow up. You know full well that isn't true.

              You also know that the republicans voted against the democrats bill for the border, because Trump told them too, because he didn't want to make Biden look good. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-block-border-security-bill-campaign-border-chaos-rcna153607

              On many occasions, you and a few others on here have gone far beyond differing political opinions, into straight up trolling. Pretending to be a MAGA moron is not a good look, you know. Take your bullshit elsewhere.

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: Musk Ambition

                Oh grow up. You know full well that isn't true.

                You also know that the republicans voted against the democrats bill for the border, because Trump told them too, because he didn't want to make Biden look good.

                Some Republicans may be crazy, but they're not that crazy. They realise the impossibility of making Biden look good. Plus Biden may be in the process of making whoever comes next look bad because he likes neither Harris nor Trump and isn't especially happy with the way the 'Democrats' robbed him of his second term. I really hope he (ghost)writes a book about that.

                But it's one of those simple things to 'fact check'. So illegal immigrants crossing the border during Trump's term vs Biden. Especially as Harris was appointed the 'Border Tzar' and did.. nothing. Somehow, if she and her knucklehead running mate are elected, this time it'll be different. What Harris didn't achieve during her 3.5yrs will suddenly somehow become achievable. Not only will she prevent lipstick sticking to sippy cups, but she'll build a wall!

                Someone else suggested that, and started doing that, but the Demorats spent a lot of time and effort obstructing efforts to secure the border. There was also stuff like Mayorkas and the allegations that Border Patrol agents had been horsewhipping immigrants. Fake news, and despite his dismal record 'in charge' of the US Department of Homeland Security, he hasn't been sacked. But that's the Demorats for you. Nothing says they're the champions of democracy quite like shipping in thousands of illegal immigrants, and especially people like Gavin Newsom declaring any attempts to implement voter ID would be illegal in California..

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Musk Ambition

                  Some Republicans may be crazy, but they're not that crazy.

                  The facts suggest otherwise. Colluding with what is in essence straight up treason is not what I would call sane - there's very little left of the party now it's been Trumpified.

                  1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                    Re: Musk Ambition

                    The facts suggest otherwise

                    And what 'facts' would those be? The ones Democrats have told you are true, or..?

                    Colluding with what is in essence straight up treason is not what I would call sane

                    Ah, there you go.. Treason huh? What do you mean by this, and what facts do you have to support this? Remember something is fact should be objectively verifiable. But this is the problem with TDS and propaganda. You can no longer distinguish fact from fiction or act in any kind of rational or objective way. It's exactly the same as people who've become victims of cults, and it can be very hard to overcome their beliefs. But it is possible, if only you can learn to be objective again.

                    1. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: Musk Ambition

                      My dear boy, if all the convictions by his peers and independent reporting are not enough facts for you then you live as much in cuckoo land as most current Trump supporters, and then I'd be wasting my time.

                      Only if you learn comprehensive reading and logic will you see through the BS that has been lobbed at you.

                      The problem is that you don't seem to see the cycle of Democrats cleaning up after each Republican tour of the White House, but getting blamed for the mess their predecessors made (and my morons not realising this they get away with it, every single time). As long as you don't realise you're repeatedly taken for a ride without lubricant by the same people promising you sunshine and happiness whilst simultaneously robbing you blind and hauling the country (and the world) closer to a recession for no other reason than pretty much uncontrolled greed and zero interest in making YOUR life better (yes, you), than I'm sorry, you need help. Just check who stopped legislation to protect you over the years, that was always the GOP. Speaking of which, I assume you're not married either because women don't exactly get a decent deal from these people.

                      It has always amazed me that the ratio of psychiatrist to inhabitants is so high in the US, but clearly it's still not high enough.

                    2. Casca Silver badge

                      Re: Musk Ambition

                      "You can no longer distinguish fact from fiction or act in any kind of rational or objective way. "

                      More projecting...

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Musk Ambition

                  you really would drink that poison cool aid if the orange twat told you too. no amount of pointing out the truth will ever correct what mental issue you have!

                3. John Smith 19 Gold badge

                  "Some Republicans may be crazy, but they're not that crazy. "

                  No. They are exactly that crazy.

                  And I'm pretty sure you know it.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Musk Ambition

          I'll be kind, and assume that you are simply entirely ignorant to what Musk and Trump and RFK represent.

          Don't post on the subject again until you've read up on it.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Musk Ambition

            You're generously assuming that the poster still has enough of an attention span to read more than the length of a hat slogan..

        3. Casca Silver badge

          Re: Musk Ambition

          Wow, you really have no clue how the world work

      2. SundogUK Silver badge

        Re: Musk Ambition

        "The clue is in the meaning of the word "amendments"."

        You don't understand the US Constitution then. The first ten amendments, (the Bill of Rights') were always intended to be part of the base document. They were called 'amendments' to distinguish them from those parts of the Constitution which defined how the federal government would function.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Musk Ambition

          And you do? You forgot some of the rest:

          13th amendment - abolishment of slavery.

          18th amendment - prohibition.

          21st amendment - removal of prohibition.

          Textbook definition of amendments.

        2. KarMann Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Musk Ambition

          Yep, gotta love that 3/5 compromise, amirite?

          1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Unhappy

            "Yep, gotta love that 3/5 compromise, amirite?"

            As I've noted before this should have gone down the sh***er of history when the North defeated the South in the American Civil War.

            Along with the Electoral College, which was partly designed to protect the Republic from some slick talking demagogue who'd turned the minds of the uneducated (IE slaves) but would be unable to sway the level headed well educated Electors (IE free White men) of the College.

            IRL it's meant that what 40-50 000 people in a few key states think matters more than the 10s of millions of voters across the country.

            The FOCF is a demagogue who has never won the Popular Vote in either 2016 or 2020 and IMHO 2024 will make them a 3 time loser provided the Democrats get out the vote on the day.

            The EC enabled him to win in 2016, as the Republican stuffed SCOTUS helped Bush Jnr win before him. The EC needs scrapping, the SCOTUS reform.

    2. Sora2566 Silver badge

      Re: Musk Ambition

      "misinformation happens to be protected speech under the US 1st Amendment."

      The best argument you can think of for defending this behaviour is that the US Government can't arrest you for it?

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Musk Ambition

        "The best argument you can think of for defending this behaviour is that the US Government can't arrest you for it?"

        The mind boggles, doesn't it?

    3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Musk Ambition

      "Musk claimed to be for free speech as far as the law allows"

      Oh, has he back-tracked on his "free speech absolutist" claim then? Because "free speech absolutist" by definition, transcends any limitations, even those placed by law. It's what absolute means. No limits.

      1. veti Silver badge

        Re: Musk Ambition

        He never claimed to be a "free-speech absolutist". Only "a bit of a free-speech absolutist".

        By all means despise the man, but let's not distort his own words against him. There's no need.

        1. Androgynous Cupboard Silver badge

          Re: Musk Ambition

          So he’s a partial absolutist? Well that clears that up.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Musk Ambition

            and fulltime bellend

            1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              Unhappy

              and fulltime bellend

              Not the first public figure to go off the hard right deep end.

              Charles Lindberg fell in with Fascism following the kidnapping of his child and hooking up with a French doctor who was a big fan of Eugenics.

              Sadly Musk seems to have handled the loss of his son (but the gaining of a daughter) by engaging in a "War on woke." :-(

              It seems there's no one who can say to him "Elon, you're being a right knob. Let's crack a few beers, smoke a bit and listen to that chat you had with that Duffus running for President. I can't believe how he fell for it ."

              Pity really. I'm feeling an Olivander moment about Voldermort.

        2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Musk Ambition

          Only "a bit of a free-speech absolutist".

          If you've done 6 impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe?

          Partially absolute is NOT a thing. "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Musk Ambition

          > He never claimed to be a "free-speech absolutist". Only "a bit of a free-speech absolutist".

          Which "bit" of a free-speech absolutist was used to create Musk then? The arsehole?

        4. Random person

          Re: Musk Ambition

          This tweet by Elon Musk seems to disgree with you.

          > Starlink has been told by some governments (not Ukraine) to block Russian news sources. We will not do so unless at gunpoint.

          >

          > Sorry to be a free speech absolutist.

          https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600?s=20

          I found this Xit via this article https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-09-14/elon-musk-says-he-s-pro-free-speech-but-fired-twitter-staff-for-comments

          1. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Musk Ambition

            "I found this Xit via this article https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-09-14/elon-musk-says-he-s-pro-free-speech-but-fired-twitter-staff-for-comments"

            He fired a load of SpaceX employees as well for pointing out to HR that Elon was being a right knob.

        5. MachDiamond Silver badge

          Re: Musk Ambition

          "Only "a bit of a free-speech absolutist"."

          He's come out plenty of times without saying "a bit". You'd also have to discard all of the blather that follows in support of that statement.

          There's a lot of sentence crafting with Elon/Tesla. It can be important to read transcripts from earnings calls exactly and not leave out words as most of us often do to simplify the information that we are taking in. It's a legal disclosure and the words can be used in a very particular way to try and say/infer one thing, but read another.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Musk Ambition

            Yes, he is rather good (and generous) with BS, isn't he, especially on earnings calls when he distracts people from less than brilliant revenue by announcing something new he has no intention of actually following up?

            Amazingly, like Trump it doesn't seem to matter that he's subsequently found out.

            I'm not quite sure what's going on in the US, but I'm beginning to think that brain damaging water lead poisoning isn't just limited to Flint, Michigan.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Musk Ambition

              all the times I have visited the USA, I have always been shocked how backwards they are compared to Europe, it's like we shipped all the braindead idiots there!.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Musk Ambition

                Are you sure you didn't walk into Parliament?

                :)

      2. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: Musk Ambition

        "Oh, has he back-tracked on his "free speech absolutist" claim then?"

        He keeps pushing, but he IS finding that many countries in the world have their own ways of seeing things regardless of how he thinks they should. You don't see Elon bashing China or defying their laws and edicts as they don't make as much distinction between Xitter and Tesla if it's Elon making waves. Without China, the narrative about Tesla as a going concern changes. The Chinese government also holds title to the factory and allows Tesla to operate without a domestic "partner" on good behavior. With the landlord being Government, use of the military isn't ruled out if the factory is ordered shut temporarily or permanently. There doesn't seem to be much question that they'd go to those lengths to make a point.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Musk Ambition

      "...misinformation happens to be protected speech under the US 1st Amendment."

      Alas, there are other countries than God's own, and since X is/wants to remain a global media company, the laws of other countries also need to be respected.

    5. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Kerry Ambition

      Musk claimed to be for free speech as far as the law allows and misinformation happens to be protected speech under the US 1st Amendment.

      Yes, but the 1st Amendment is so terribly inconvenient-

      https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/09/29/john_kerry_tells_wef_our_first_amendment_stands_as_a_major_block_against_hammering_disinformation_out_of_existence.html

      But look, if people only go to one source, and the source they go to is sick, and, you know, has an agenda and they're putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence.

      So what we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern, by hopefully winning enough votes that you're free to be able to implement change.

      If only the pesky public didn't keep questioning the official misinformation, it would be so much easier for people like Kerry to enrich their mates & donors..

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Kerry Ambition

        Who broke you?

        1. Casca Silver badge

          Re: Kerry Ambition

          My guess is a left leaning Ukrainian.

  8. Splod

    Brainwashed

    Half the world is brainwashed by the left. What is right-wing anyway? I hold views that were considered left of central when I was young, now they are considered right or even extreme right by some. We haven't changed. Most of the "right", excluding a few true extremes, believe in democracy, freedom, god-given rights and literal liberalism. We believe in small state and national sovereignity not giving away power to un-elected bodies such as the UN, WHO, WEF, Tri-lateral commissions, CIA, EU, Media, Central Banks ... the list is extensive. We, the people, want to hold those powers, we want institutions of government to do our will and serve us. That is what is now called right-wing!

    Those un-elected by bodies and most of the left are pursuing a barely disguised agenda to establish a one-world government and feudal society with no voting, "experts" will decide everything for us. Basically, people become cattle. Wake up! That's all of us not just the people you don't like unless you are in the billionaire club or are one of the elites execs. And execs are easily replaced and interchangeable if they start getting upity.

    1. Headley_Grange Silver badge

      Re: Brainwashed

      "believe in democracy" - but only if it's our people voting and the vote goes our way.

      "god-given rights" - but only if it's our god.

      "national sovereignty" - but only for us; we'll happily support other countries getting fucked over.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Brainwashed

      "Most of the rightt believe.....". It's not what you believe that's going to destroy the US, it's who you believe.

    3. James Hughes 1

      Re: Brainwashed

      Sad I can only downvote this once.

    4. GenericLeftieWhackjob

      Comrade O'Brien, the doublethink isn't working...

      Just ignore the fact that some Silicon Valley figures openly see "red team" as useful for creating their actual feudal city-states and the #2 guy on the red team ticket is a rentboy for the same.

      https://newrepublic.com/article/180487/balaji-srinivasan-network-state-plutocrat

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Coat

        "red team ticket is a rentboy for the same."

        "Rentboy" is a bit harsh. Thiel doesn't seem to have gotten much out of pumping $15m into his campaign and getting him all his jobs since college.

        Other than a somewhat extensive interest in male grooming products Shady has a wife and kids. They have been known to turn up to his rallies on occaision.

        Perhaps "Courtesan" or Geisha might be a more accurate connotation?

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Brainwashed

      Dipstick.

      The Overton Window has shifted the other direction. If your views were central when you were young, they'd be considered left wing now. The fact you admit you are now an extreme right wingers is an indictment on you, not the lefties.

    6. veti Silver badge

      Re: Brainwashed

      If "most of the right" really believes all that, why is Donald ("you won't have to vote again") Trump its nominee for president?

      I'm sorry, but your own party has abandoned you. It may be time to reevaluate your position.

    7. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Coat

      Splod

      Joined 18 Oct 2023

      'Nuff said.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Splod

        To be fair, that's almost a year ago!

    8. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Brainwashed

      By the way, the EU is elected. The UN has representatives from each country (chosen by your elected government).

      Media, yep, propaganda based Fox, OAN, Newsmax. We agree there.

      You say you want democracy and freedom, yet support the opposite.

      This is what you don't understand:

      • You want to be FREE to do what you want, DESPITE how it affects others.
      • You want to be FREE to chastise and attack people you don't like.
      • You want to be FREE to ban anything you don't like (books, gay marriage, human rights for "others", "dodgy" religions etc.etc.)

      Your idea of Freedom is called authoritarianism, or Fascism. It's not freedom at all.

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Unhappy

        "Your idea of Freedom is called authoritarianism, or Fascism. It's not freedom at all."

        Actually it's SOP for the FOCF.

        Summed up as "Freedom for me*, but not for thee."

        *And in the FOCF's case that means Me entirely and only. IE a King. Y'know, like the kind the founding fathers fought a war for to get out from under.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "Your idea of Freedom is called authoritarianism, or Fascism. It's not freedom at all."

          Standard Operating Procedure for the Free Operating Cash Flow?

  9. Bbuckley

    Surprise surprise. The Social Media (apart from X) are a deeply harmful ultra-communist attack on Western Democracy. Fuck them all.

    1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

      I thought you were being sarcastic until I read your posting history.

      Sigh.. In my day, the sad kiddies would at least put a bit of effort into their trolling. The whole point is to make a comment that is ridiculous, but in a plausible way. The more contentious the comment, the better. A sprinkling of cluelessness helps convince the marks that you are serious.

      But this attempt? No subtlety. Too many stupid statements in one sentence, and obvious deliberate bullshit about subject matters that is not even up for debate in the rational world.

      That's not going to annoy anyone - they'll just think you're a bit of a twat.

      It's as effective a troll as saying "You are all 2 foot tall dwarfs who can't even see that the sky is purple and the moon is made of cheese".

      Do better kiddo.

      1. ecofeco Silver badge

        Today's edgelords got no game.

    2. ecofeco Silver badge

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

      Oh wait, you're serious?

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

      And go take your meds.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Russian influence

    It is not about the conservatives, but rather who is targeted right now by the extensive Putin's propaganda and his fake sites. The existence of a huge number of such sites and bot networks is well proven. Democrats have been their target even before Trump.

    It is strange that the Conservative Party is insisting on Trump as a candidate purely based on this "online support". As if there were no better conservative candidates. Or simply accepting the shortcut directed by Putin. Or confirming the worst: the actual president does not matter - the more marketable, the better.

    The best short summary of Trump was given by Charlie Munger: "stark raving mad": https://youtu.be/RGLMnTzQIh8?t=29

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Russian influence

      It is not about the conservatives, but rather who is targeted right now by the extensive Putin's propaganda and his fake sites. The existence of a huge number of such sites and bot networks is well proven. Democrats have been their target even before Trump.

      Hillary said this, so it must be true. In between pausing to wipe her illegal mail server with a cloth.

      Problem isn't The Putin, it's the dark arts. There are countless NGOs, astroturfers and lobbying groups all peddling their own misinformation. A plurality of news and the ability to discuss assorted claims and counter claims are pretty much the only way to prevent people getting conned by all this garbage. Which is why Democrat grandees like John Kerry have been whining that the First Amendment is making it so hard to govern.

      This is just one of those things governments will have to deal with, along with managing threats from external actors. We've been spending decades demonising Russia, attempting to interfere with their and other countries elections, so why the suprise and outrage that other countries might be doing the same to us?

      1. Headley_Grange Silver badge

        Re: Russian influence

        "Russian elections". Thanks for giving me a laugh to start the weekend off. Have an ironic upvote.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Russian influence

          "Russian elections". Thanks for giving me a laugh to start the weekend off. Have an ironic upvote.

          Yep, they have them. But we also spent millions on Navalny trying to promote him as Russia's answer to Ukraine's Yatsenyuk. That was money well spent.

          Meanwhile, in other news, the EU is taking Hungary to court for implementing their version of the US FARA Act, and has also been loudly objecting to Georgia (not the US one) doing the same. Oh, and Ukraine's been shouting at Rutte for not having a NATO no-fly zone over Ukraine when NATO(ish) forces shot down Iranian missiles heading for Israel from illegaly occupied bases in Syria.

          On which point, according to one slightly used Prime Minister, Bibi bugged Bojo's bog. Such is the way the Great Game is played. But one positive is that copies of BoJo's book might soon cost less than toilet paper.

          Oh, and on a US domestic note. Aid to Ukraine, $200bn and counting. Aid to Americans affected by Helene.. $750. Plus another round of heavily massaged job figures.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Russian influence

            Your man shouldn't have invaded Ukraine then.

            1. Casca Silver badge

              Re: Russian influence

              Nah, according to JE he didnt invade Ukraine...

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: Russian influence

                Nah, according to JE he didnt invade Ukraine..

                True. I have never invaded Ukraine. I have visited it a few times, including a fun trip to photograph Chernobyl. Have you ever been to Ukraine?

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Russian influence

                  well that explains a lot, your not supposed to eat the dirt there.

                  get some scans done, you seem to have a brain tumor sending you mad!

                2. MachDiamond Silver badge

                  Re: Russian influence

                  "have you ever been to Ukraine?"

                  I've never been there but I've seen a lot of their movies

                  errr, is that sharing too much?

          2. Casca Silver badge

            Re: Russian influence

            Yep, they have them.

            Yea, North Korea have them also...

      2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Happy

        "so why the suprise and outrage that other countries might be doing the same to us?"

        I didn't know you were American.

    2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      "https://youtu.be/RGLMnTzQIh8?t=29"

      Spoiler alert. He doesn't actually say that in the interview.

      But it's quite clear he thinks it. And this is 2011, loooong before the whole country had a chance to see what a SEL the FOCF would be in office. His very "special" response to Covid (which made gas soooo cheap, if you could actually drive around that is). Not to mention his ability to deflect hurricanes with just a felt tip pen.

      I'd just remind US voters who reckon he's a great businessman.

      He's had 3 casinos, all of which went bankrupt.

      He was the first President since Hoover in the early 20's to leave office with fewer Americans employed than when he came in.

      OTOH he did add $6 000 000 000 000 to the USG deficit in unfunded tax cuts (which got Liz Truss dumped in 49 days), which is more than Medicare and Social Security combined. cost to run.

      But if you still think he's a safe pair of hands to run the US economy go for it.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: "https://youtu.be/RGLMnTzQIh8?t=29"

        "He's had 3 casinos, all of which went bankrupt."

        Since you've done the research, please post the casino's names and whether Mr Trump was the owner/majority stake holder at the time of bankruptcy or had previously sold the property while licensing the "Trump" name to remain with it. It has gone both ways although I don't think it's a 50/50 split.

        There are lots of factors that can lead to a company going bankrupt that are out of the hands of the managers as well as there being poor management. In the US, the bankruptcy laws do need tightening up so it's not a very good safety net that companies will rely on to allow them to make risky business decisions. The airlines tend to go through bankruptcy on a cyclic basis. I'd never invest in one. I'm not saying that I'd invest in any Trump enterprise either.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "https://youtu.be/RGLMnTzQIh8?t=29"

          Just a click away... https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+bankrupt+casinos

    3. ecofeco Silver badge

      Re: Russian influence

      It's both,

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Only two people complaining about WEF?

    My usual test for right-wing nut jobs is looking for posts blaming "WEF". There are yellow posters up in the Town Centre and next to supermarkets near here full of references to them. I was amazed that only two people blames their troubles on them.

  12. M.V. Lipvig Silver badge

    Means nothing

    To a liberal, the definition of a low quality link is "disagrees with the liberal position." That's it. This is no different than California claiming that petty theft is down after changing felony theft to 950 bucks or more, then telling the cops that anything under 950 bucks won't be prosecuted. The cops refuse to waste their time writing reports on theft less than 950 bucks, so "reported crime" drops.

    Thumb me down, leftists. Your downvotes make me smile.

    1. mevets

      Re: Means nothing

      There are other ways to induce smiles.

      Learning is a healthy one.

    2. DoctorPaul Bronze badge

      Re: Means nothing

      Happy to oblige

    3. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Means nothing

      "The cops refuse to waste their time writing reports on theft less than 950 bucks, so "reported crime" drops."

      The word smithing comes into play too. There's "reported crime" although that's very vague a term, but being pedantic, it's not a "crime" until there has been a conviction. Watching some of the cop videos, there will be a big deal about getting somebody arrested that's clearly been naughty and even though the perp fought tooth and nail with officers, the charges get pared down to disorderly something and assigned a small fine. That can be an "infraction" which is less than a misdemeanor and the felonies wind up getting dropped since there's no room to stack miscreants as prisons are closed.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Means nothing

      If showing the world that you're a paranoid nutcase also makes you smile, you should be grinning like the Cheshire Cat after that post.

  13. hnwombat
    Holmes

    Unsurprising finding. Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

    1. ecofeco Silver badge

      I had to scroll this far.

      Have my upvote.

  14. BasicReality

    Same shit, different day.

    Leftists make up bullshit that conservatives post false information, use that to justify censorship. Typically, the conservatives are proven right however.

    1. Casca Silver badge

      Re: Same shit, different day.

      Sure, in your reallity maybe...

  15. Groo The Wanderer

    Republicans aren't smart enough to tell the difference between truth and utter bullshit, apparently...

  16. aelfheld

    Huh?

    Conservatives say socialism works?

    BlueAnon is just as full of it as QAnon. Russian collusion anyone?

  17. Phil Koenig Bronze badge

    Correlation is not Causation

    At least here in the USA these days there is a growing mental laziness amongst the press and some sectors of the "science" community, along with a degree of credulousness amongst the public, that exploits the modern ease of crunching numbers digitally and falls victim to the temptation of using this to create sensational clickbait based upon junk science.

    These so-called "researchers" often jump to all sorts of unwarranted conclusions simply because of some fuzzy correlations which they do not actually understand, nor have they actually discovered much less proven any sort of actual, demonstrable cause/effect relationship, other than being vaguely "correlated" amongsts the factors they cherry-picked to publish such "studies".

    This sort of junk-science will tell you nonsense like "[ethnicity X] children are academic underachievers" instead of what they are typically really measuring, like "Certain factors in poor neighborhoods (with a disproportionate number of "ethnicity X" families, poorly funded schools due to lack of a robust tax base in the region and a high overall level of crime and violence in the area) tend to undermine academic achievement".

    This is the same sort of populist agitprop we see when so-called journalists or scientists jump to unsupported clickbait such as "Fact-checkers target right-wing people just because of their politics" when in fact such individuals are generally just being singled-out for their tendency to spread nonsense.

    Stephen Colbert's famous line that "Reality has a well-known liberal bias" may have been tongue-in-cheek but there is actually something to this.

    As one Redditor sums it up nicely:

    That's the point of liberalism. It emerged from the Enlightenment as an ideology that threw off the shackles of religion, the belief in noble bloodlines, and was based on the ideas of empirical knowledge and scientific study.

    Reality has a liberal bias because liberalism is based on what can be proven.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AskALiberal/comments/oekupc/comment/h46vydx/

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Stay in school kids

    Don’t become a conservative

  19. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Joke

    I've always thought of Musk as a "Law and Order guy"

    As long as he makes the laws and gives the orders.

  20. nautica Silver badge
    Boffin

    A basic misunderstanding of how basic (academic type) logic works...

    From the title: "It's true, social media moderators do go after conservatives"

    ...which is precisely the same as trying to garner attention (eyeballs? clicks?) by inferring a bias by invasive-species-controlling environmentalists with the headline

    "It's true, those people worried about invasive species in Florida do go after pythons"

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: A basic misunderstanding of how basic (academic type) logic works...

      "It's true, those people worried about invasive species in Florida do go after pythons"

      Florida should simply export pythons to California to help manage their nutria explosion. What could possibly go wrong?

  21. thexfile

    Nowadays to be conservative is to spew misinformation everywhere.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like