you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 37 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (62 children)
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (31 children)

    If you read that whole page you linked to you would see they haven't produced fake news so much as they consistently misrepresent facts to suit a conservative narrative.

    So arguing it could be AI means you failed to actually read their fucking reasoning for the low credibility and bias claims. None of it had to do with facts not being true, but rather presenting those true facts within a conservative narrative. Whitmer is mentioned several times, and in each case it was rooted in real facts but presented with a conservative slant.

    Screaming "fake news" is unhelpful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago* (16 children)

    Screaming “fake news” is unhelpful.

    Vetting sources absolutely is helpful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (15 children)

    It's clear they didn't actually vet the source or read what mediabiasfactcheck said then, because at no point did they make "fake news." So the likelihood of this being AI is near zero.

    Taking the top line that some group made and not actually looking at the details is not vetting a source, it's taking a quick glance as gospel. It matters that they don't make fake news because it makes this video likely real.

    But I mean you do you if you just take a quick glance as gospel and don't actually, you know, fucking read anything yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    "Don't trust this to be any more than AI" directly implies that it must be fake.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    LMAO it's a fucking video dude. You're saying you're NOT saying it's AI while claiming it might be AI? What part of the video is real and what part is AI and what part is taken out of context. You're just pulling shit out of your ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    You just outright refuse to read the fact that they have never been found to make up facts. That would include making fake AI videos dude.

    Anyway thanks for admitting you refuse to take a look at the facts and instead are screaming ITS FAKE with no evidence to back it up other than feels.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    You keep repeating the low credibility but you refuse to read with or engage with WHY they got that rating, and it wasn't for not presenting facts or making shit up, its purely ideological and how they PRESENT facts.

    So how are they PRESENTING this that is making it biased? When they make a full report on it I expect it to be DEEPLY biased, but the video on it's own is very likely real. I'm happy to be proven wrong.

    But I think you just read LOW CREDIBILITY and your brain shuts off and you cant suss out that there's a difference between actually presenting fake journalism and fake stories versus deeply misrepresenting what those facts mean. They got low credibility for BIAS, not FACTS.

    Sorry I bothered to read their fucking reasoning and you won't

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Snopes confirmed the video's authenticity with the videographer who shot it. However, the audio was too distorted to definitively confirm the specifics of the conversation.

    Man you and this conservative media outlet have a lot in common with MISREPRESENTING FACTS

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    You keep putting "fake news" in quotations like it's something they said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago* (13 children)

    Cool. Whatever. Find me a better source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (12 children)

    lmao, jesus. Sorry I asked you to read and ripped a hole in your pulled out of your ass AI theory.

    They don't have a history of making shit up. They have a history of being extremely biased. This video has no commentary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago* (11 children)

    Soooooo no other source beside some shithole far-right subpar slop?

    Last chance!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (9 children)

    Oh I'm sure there's plenty of sources here for this obviously surreptitiously recorded video. /s

    Dismissing the source when the facts are real is in, a word, stupid.

    Why don't you prove to me they have a history of making shit up? Oh yeah, because your own source proves that wrong, ding-a-ling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    I mean, things take time. The Drudge Report wasn't wrong about Monica, he was just an asshole. Assholes can be right and still refer to facts but present those facts in a different ideological context.

    but I clearly was never going to get through to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Snopes confirmed the video's authenticity with the videographer who shot it. However, the audio was too distorted to definitively confirm the specifics of the conversation.

    Even Snopes says its authentic you fucking moron, but I guess it's "nothing more than AI" whatever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    I'm getting upset lmao dude, sorry that you're desperately trying to ragebait me. Sorry that calling a fucking moron a fucking moron makes people think you're mad lmao

    You have done nothing but shift goalposts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    You're the one who has decided I am doing that instead of actually addressing any of my points. Your claim that it was AI and the video is authentic. That they have low credibility but that low credibility is related to their bias, not to outright making shit up. That's shifting goalposts, dear.

    I was never taken in, I just don't dismiss a source when there is no evidence that the facts they produce are you know, facts. This video is authentic. It's up to individuals to decide what they hear, it's also why audio forensics would help.

    I live with and caretake for family members, trust me, I spent a lot of time with them in the pool today already.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (13 children)

    Do we seriously have to insinuate that people are Nazis every half a second? Could we just like, instead, not do that? Here on the threadiverse?

    The point you're trying to make is frankly weaker for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (12 children)

    The truth is, their point is made weaker for using a far-right trash source with low credibility. Why they used that specific source should raise serious eyebrows.

    In fairness, I simply asked a question; how they responded reveals so much more. Though if you're regurgitating the most fringe fucking garbage right-wing media points that just so happens to have wedge-drive the left, yes, I think that raises some red flags.

    I will continue to call such people out, and if they instead turned around and went, "Hey yeah you're right, this source is dogshit and Snopes couldn't even verify what was said in the video, so sorry for spreading this bullshit nazi trash" I'd say no harm no foul.

    Edit: By the way, I never said they were center-right; I was citing MBFC. Please, I encourage one to read more carefully. Though anyone with half a brain knows by the standards of Overton Window, that means far-right in US politics. If you disagree, then congratulations, you're enabling fascism or should review the rightward trajectory of the Overton Window.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (11 children)

    My brother in Christ you already described it as being center-right and now you're exaggerating that to try and make your point more sailient

    I agree that its an irreputable source and that the quality of the source should always be pointed out. But if you seriously think using a less than reputable source on a link aggregator site when it confirms their biases makes someone a Nazi I'm pretty damn confident your bar is set cartoonishly low.

    I don't care whether you think they have credibility, you can make your case that they don't; calling anyone and everyone a Nazi still damages yours. Your point would be stronger sans that assertion.

    I didn't downvote you, but I think you can see lots of others did-- I guarantee you'd be more well received if you left out the heinous personal attacks without adequate basis and just stuck to your very strong argument that the source is uncredible and not something we should trust blindly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (9 children)

    I didn't downvote you

    Lmao

    Youre right, everyone who disagrees with you is a tankie or a right-winger (we have so many of those here). You should just never engage with critique in any form because youre obviously always right, and anyone who disagrees must either be stupid or arguing in bad faith

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    Oh oops. Let me correct the misclick. Tell you what. I'll even upvote you, since you clearly care so much!

    Also, thanks for confirming you're fucking weird lol.

    Can you see what I tagged you, too? ;)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    If you downvote someone at the same time as you reply and theres only one downvote, deep at the bottom of a thread, it makes it really obvious it was you, even if activitypub didn't publish votes publicly

    Also, thanks for confirming you're fucking weird lol.

    Says the person crashing out on the fediverse and blatantly arguing in bad faith without knowing the activity pub standard makes all votes public, so its really easy to show you're lying lol

    Yes yes, I'm sure you think I'm a Nazi now too, we all know anyone you disagree with is, but for the record, no. Tagging users is private, at least to my understanding, though I don't have a lot of experience with the feature- I'm not sure if the mobile client I use supports it

    Have a nice day

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

    Lol, you're an idiot if you think anyone believes that was a mistake just take the L, and at no point did I defend a right wing outlet, I critisized calling people Nazis without adequate basis, I was very clear about what my position was or wasn't

    Me, like 2 comments ago:

    I agree that its an irreputable source and that the quality of the source should always be pointed out.

    ...and just stuck to your very strong argument that the source is uncredible and not something we should trust blindly.

    Straw man me harder, if you try really hard you can dismiss me as a Nazi too, the whole platform is obviously full of them, after all

    And I don't care how you vote, I care when people transparently argue in bad faith and are intellectually dishonest whenever they think they can get away with it and it serves their ability to "win" the argument. its shitty antisocial behavior, regardless of ideology

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Hey you know what, I thought it over. I don't like coyful bullshit like I pulled and only do that if I think the other side is being insincere (I have little problem fighting fire with fire if I'm convinced they threw started it). But looking it over, I don't think you're like that, so I'll be straight as you already knew: I lied. Sorry for that. I think we misunderstood each other from the start but ultimately believe we have more in common than what divides us, and share a similar vision.

    I'll just leave it at that, but sincerely, have a good rest of your day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Thats really fuckin hard to step back and do, either durring conflict or to come back and say after, full credit to you for that, I think we can all aspire to being able to take ownership of it if we realize we don't like how we handled something

    I feel like the internet makes it really hard to tell people's tone and intent with so much of the social ques like expressions and delivery stripped away and in all fairness I was somewhat flippant in my expressing frustration that someone was being compared to a Nazi, and over the internet it can be hard to read how something like that is meant, especially when lots of people are already arguing with you

    A lot of my values system is built on acting in good faith, so I really appreciate being able to get to a place of sincerity. I will say though, I think whem you put your best foot forward ypu often get people's best in response, and you might be surprised how much of the platform is actually lovely folks. Thats part of why Im reflecting that I was somewhat flippant- I didn't put my best foot forward, just wasn't really thinking about it, and I didn't get your best in return 🤷🏻‍♂️.

    Thank you, I hope that you do too :) take care lennybird!

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (14 children)

    Dispelling the myth of a 2 party system is being a Nazi? Like Clinton said, you need a public and a private position, Whitmer's private position is now public

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 3 months ago* (13 children)

    False Premise fallacy. We've not yet established the premise to be true. You sure trust far-right sources an awfully lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago* (6 children)

    And you sure distrust them despite there being zero evidence that they make up items like this.

    I would distrust their slant, but this is a video with no commentary. What slant is there?

    There's a major difference between faking shit and misrepresenting shit.

    If their facts are still true, I don't know what to say, but you do you man.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 3 months ago* (5 children)

    You sure trust a far-right outlet with LOW CREDIBILITY a lot.

    Tagged nazi. Thanks for playing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    lmao I trust what mediabiasfactcheck says, which is that they are BIASED not FAKE.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    lmao you are a dipshit, read my comment history fucko. I am an american with cancer who had been pro-Ukraine this entire time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago

    and you just read what someone else tells you and take it as gospel even when they give you the opportunity to see their reasoning, which is well laid out on the mediabiasfactcheck page

    You on the other hand need to work on your media literacy skills, because you claimed it was AI at the get-go and here we are, the video is authentic, and you still can't admit you were wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (5 children)

    If it were fake as Whitmer claims they could have captured and provided the audio from one or several of the other cameras on them at the time. Theyve had over month to do something. SNOPES confirmed the comments. Democrats dont give AF about the working class anymore than republicans

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Lots of Democrats do, actually! But that's another topic. Be careful, lots of Russian and Republican trash on here trying to spread misinformation and stop people from voting Democrats, helping fascist Republicans win in November!

    Snopes only acknowledges footage happened and audio occurred but could not independently verify or make out what was said, which means anyone could use AI to inject what they want her to say. They left Unrated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I'll make it simple for you, democrats are fascist. Pointing out that BlueMAGA operates on the same frequency as MAGA isnt spreading misinfo, its breaking down their similarities.

    IF you read the story they confirmed what was said but couldnt clarify the context.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments