|
Homeless Friend posted:I'm still left wondering actually. It's an interview he gave AFP yesterday. quote:National Assembly president Guaido told AFP he would do "everything that is necessary... to save human lives," although he acknowledged that American intervention is "a very controversial subject."
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:09 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It's an interview he gave AFP yesterday. yeah I know, I mean it's not a change in position. The Feb 2 interview. Al Jazeera posted:Opposition leader Juan Guaido says he will do everything in his power to "steer Venezuela towards democracy" while refusing to rule out backing a military intervention by the United States.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:21
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:yeah I know, I mean it's not a change in position. The Feb 2 interview. I guess the new thing then is that he refers to American military intervention as "controversial." I don't think the vast majority of people being against something is much of a "controversy," personally.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 12:43
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I guess the new thing then is that he refers to American military intervention as "controversial." I don't think the vast majority of people being against something is much of a "controversy," personally. Agreed, you would think several years of food shortages would not be a controversy either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 13:18
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdMamnbs_oo If anyone's interested in how venezuelans migrate to Peru on foot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 13:47
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:https://www.afp.com/en/news/15/venezuelas-guaido-wont-rule-out-us-intervention-force-maduros-hand-doc-1d73ed2 wtf am I blocked or something...
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 14:43
|
|
|
That’s not the message. The original message we got was a title and image with zero context scare quotes specifically trying to obscure its source. The RT article’s text itself is similarly distortive. My favorite part is how it’s chopping and screwing an AFP interview, but the bottom has an advertisement to sign up the the RT newsletter, for information “the mainstream media won’t tell you”. Edit: Russian propaganda suggests they might be floating this guy, Hugo Chavez’s oil minister Rafael Ramirez, as a controlled successor . What do folks here know about him? Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
Maduro should take some tips with Kim Jong Un on how to become bestie with Trump
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:18
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That’s not the message. The original message we got was a title and image with zero context scare quotes specifically trying to obscure its source. The RT article’s text itself is similarly distortive. My favorite part is how it’s chopping and screwing an AFP interview, but the bottom has an advertisement to sign up the the RT newsletter, for information “the mainstream media won’t tell you”. Which is why I dug up the originating article. Rt like most places just reposts poo poo. Bonus of adding, removing, or highlighting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:Which is why I dug up the originating article. Rt like most places just reposts poo poo. Bonus of adding, removing, or highlighting. Oh I entirely agree, and thank you for finding it! I just wanted to prebut the “how can you attack this sourcebwhen they’re just reposting other news stories”, as if that weren’t a major way to construct the illusion of source legitimacy. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
Just casually comparing Maduro to Saddam I'm sure there are no implications there https://twitter.com/LaCasaBlanca/status/1093559350994616325 also lol https://twitter.com/BootsRiley/status/1094032184875175936
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Oh I entirely agree, and thank you for finding it! I just wanted to prebut the “how can you attack this sourcebwhen they’re just reposting other news stories”, as if that weren’t a major way to construct the illusion of source legitimacy. Maybe you could do the minute of googling to check if there is a non-RT source yourself instead of detailing the thread by instantly calling it fake news?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:24
|
|
|
Jose posted:Just casually comparing Maduro to Saddam I'm sure there are no implications there I can’t believe the US Media would reflexively share US state propaganda. It’s never happened. It’s not like RT or Venezuela Analysis!!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
Wow, could this be real, could capitalist-owned corporate western media be publishing propaganda stories to build justification for intervention in Venezuela? No way, I thought only Russia Today and Telesur had an agenda, because they're owned by foreigners. Everyone knows all the compagnies owned by white westerners are objective and unbiased, and any story coming from them can be shared by very smart people in this thread without need for any critical perspective or fact-checking. Presenting Nipples posted:I can’t believe the US Media would reflexively share US state propaganda. It’s never happened. It’s not like RT or Venezuela Analysis!!!! Bob le Moche fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
In my opinion, people who uncritically believe everything that comes up on their tweeter feeds about a subject they have no prior knowledge of are not qualified to lecture anyone about critical perspectives and fact-checking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:
He looted PDVSA as its president/energy minister, and there was talk about him taking over when Chavez died. Maduro made him UN ambassador, probably ly to get him out of the country, but fired him about a year ago after arresting a much of people close to him in PDVSA. He then wrote a bunch of online articles where he demanded Chavez resign and accused him of betraying the Revolution. As far as I know, he's still in New York.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:04
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:Maybe you could do the minute of googling to check if there is a non-RT source yourself instead of detailing the thread by instantly calling it fake news? I see that my efforts to prebut this were in vain. The point isn't that what a message says is false- it often doesn't have to be. It's that the message is deliberately misleading in its presentation of true information - it takes true information and recasts or alters it to change what recipients take from it. That's frequently how propaganda material works. There's a reason we keep getting garbage from RT posted, instead of the root sources in mainstream media. In this case, we straight up weren't given the body of the message because it's so obviously bad that it became the subject of mockery unto itself. Epicurius posted:He looted PDVSA as its president/energy minister, and there was talk about him taking over when Chavez died. Maduro made him UN ambassador, probably ly to get him out of the country, but fired him about a year ago after arresting a much of people close to him in PDVSA. He then wrote a bunch of online articles where he demanded Chavez resign and accused him of betraying the Revolution. As far as I know, he's still in New York. Interesting, wikipedia says he was one of the subjects of 2017 individual sanctions, though afaict he's no longer on the list. This might be because he's no longer officially a Venezuelan government member, but that's unlikely. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Feb 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
I wonder how liberal interventionists must feel being proven wrong over and over again by events after every US and NATO imperialist adventure and consistently finding themselves on the wrong side of history, but continuing to place their trust in the same bankrupt worldview every single time nonetheless. Having all their allies be fascists, people like Trump, Bolsonaro, Rubio, etc, and finding themselves defending business owners and international corporations against the third world and working class, and yet managing to convince themselves that they're not tools and have noble intentions. Being constantly lied to and yet always coming back to the same sources as authorities. Having no problem with fellow pro-intervention posters in this thread posting racist poo poo like calling an Asian person "piss-colored" or defending Pinochet and making jokes about throwing people from helicopters, just because they happen to be on the same side with regards to Venezuela and against the evil leftist "tankies". It's no wonder that a so many middle-class liberals and centrists inevitably graduate to becoming full right-wingers when push comes to shove or they get older. The cognitive dissonance must be unbearable. When you spend your whole life convincing yourself that the decisions your national ruling class is taking for you is what you actually want and rationalizing your own submission to right-wing interests, always punching left, where else can you end up?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Wow, could this be real, could capitalist-owned corporate western media be publishing propaganda stories to build justification for intervention in Venezuela? No way, I thought only Russia Today and Telesur had an agenda, because they're owned by foreigners. Everyone knows all the compagnies owned by white westerners are objective and unbiased, and any story coming from them can be shared by very smart people in this thread without need for any critical perspective or fact-checking. Comparing the bbc to Russia times. Really?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Comparing the bbc to Russia times. Really? lol the BBC is complete trash now
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Comparing the bbc to Russia times. Really? Fair point, the entire UK media sphere should be compared to RT at this point lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:34
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I see that my efforts to prebut this were in vain. The point isn't that what a message says is false- it often doesn't have to be. It's that the message is deliberately misleading in its presentation of true information - it takes true information and recasts or alters it to change what recipients take from it. That's frequently how propaganda material works. There's a reason we keep getting garbage from RT posted, instead of the root sources in mainstream media. In this case, we straight up weren't given the body of the message because it's so obviously bad that it became the subject of mockery unto itself. The substance of the message is that Guaido won't rule out American military intervention. Harping on RT is pointless when the AFP source has already been posted, and it's bizarre that you think you're proving a point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:37
|
|
|
Truga posted:Fair point, the entire UK media sphere should be compared to RT at this point lmao Do you believe there is any good MSM left or we should just be sourcing all of our news from twitter threads and infowars?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Do you believe there is any good MSM left or we should just be sourcing all of our news from twitter threads and infowars? Yeah, I read Mladina, it's amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Do you believe there is any good MSM left or we should just be sourcing all of our news from twitter threads and infowars? Here's a BBC article from last year normalizing Brazilian neo-nazis as "snappy dressing young conservatives". They are now in government. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-43414315 And the reason I brought up BBC in the context of the conversation about the Venezuela-Colombia bridge is because of this article uncritically reproducing the pro-intervention propaganda about it: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47143492
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
mainstream media was never good, you should always read it critically and go back to primary sources if u have the time
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
I appreciate the straightforwardness of the false dichotomy frame Bob le Moche uses here, because it really demonstrates the impoverishment of the epistemic relativism argument. There are, in fact, ways to approach information sources that don't require either 1. Totalizing, solipsistic relativism about bias. This position lets the believer select whatever messages cater to their prior beliefs, and makes them a fantastic mark for misleading messages. Like, yes, we know postmodernism is a thing. This is much less mind-blowing than you think it is. 2. Strict privileging the positions of specific message sources, be they "capitalist-owned corporate western media" or "owned by foreigners" or anything else. I mean, the idea that folks are doing this is kinda facile, but that's the tomato that's getting thrown. Alternatives to either of these approaches require some degree of scrutiny of the construction of messages, and I don't mean a broad theory of "media". I mean actually looking at the motivations and constitution of specific sources, and the techniques and tools used in the creation of specific messages. Not all messages or sources are equal, and none are absolutely trustworthy, but we can use other sources of information, observation, and logic testing to identify the motives, methods, accuracy, and, ultimately, trustworthiness of sources. In analyzing sources, we are flawed and imperfect. One of our biggest weaknesses is that our resources are limited, and we are vulnerable to manipulation by deceptive sources, even those we know we should not trust. Sources that have a deliberate, intentional program of deception are thus worth rejecting out of hand, except (when we have the time and tools) to study them and identify how they are trying to abuse the good faith of our analysis. Message scrutiny is time and effort-intensive, which is why we use a variety of heuristics to allocate our respective uncertainty about messages. On technical or specialized subjects, or anything where we don't have subject-specific knowledge, one of the most straightforward heuristics is to find people with direct knowledge that can directly respond to questions. One of the strongest anchors this thread has in evaluating sources information is that we have posters who are actually personally familiar with the situation in Venezuela, who don't just post news, but who are also so generous that they answer questions and respond to pushback. People who are able to do this about Venezuela (or, in other threads, about cars, or law, or video games, or what have you) are what makes this forum great. It's why I spend so much time asking questions and discussing sources, rather than giving definitive statements. Pener Kropoopkin posted:The substance of the message is that Guaido won't rule out American military intervention. Harping on RT is pointless when the AFP source has already been posted, and it's bizarre that you think you're proving a point. The substance of the message shifts when the RT article (which, again, we only got the title of) pushes all mention of food aid down to paragraph six, past several other advertisements for other messages from RT about Venezuela. That shift seems immaterial to you because you've already accepted the way its authors are framing its content. The shift is deliberate, and is one example of a whole host of other really obvious ways that the article attempts to reframe and shift the content of the original source to manipulate the perceptions of the message recipient.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 17:53
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The substance of the message shifts when the RT article (which, again, we only got the title of) pushes all mention of food aid down to paragraph six, past several other advertisements for other messages from RT about Venezuela. That shift seems immaterial to you because you've already accepted the way its authors are framing its content. The shift is deliberate, and is one example of a whole host of other really obvious ways that the article attempts to reframe and shift the content of the original source to manipulate the perceptions of the message recipient. The substance of the message is that Guaido won't rule out the possibility of American military action. How is that materially shifted in the RT article, and why does it matter to this thread when the source in AFP is posted? Do you have any comment on the claims of AFP? Do you have any comment on Guaido calling American intervention "controversial?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Lol don't try to pull this poo poo until posting news from CNN and BBC is treated with the same hostility in this thread as posting a RT story is. I was being sarcastic 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:31
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Comparing the bbc to Russia times. Really? P E R F I D I O U S A L B I O N
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
I know you know this and are being disingenuous, but for the benefit of others, the entirety of the original AFP message is the substance of the original message. The selection and framing of a narrower "substance", the selection of meaning, is an act by the recipient and, in this case, also the mediating entity acting upon the message. All changes to the original message's content in the course of being reconstructed as a new message by RT are deliberate. Pushing the aid references down in the RT article (versus their direct reference in the third paragraph, and general framing in other parts of the AFP story) is a deliberate choice to get readers to disregard this part of the message. To be clear, there are a ton of much more obvious manipulative moves in the article, from the use of scare quotes to the image selection to the use of interstitial story links, to the order of clauses. But we know these arguments you're now raising are disingenuous because the original posting of the message excluded anything but its title. We also know that RT is propaganda, that it's a part of a larger information source system that acts in bad faith. We have common sense, and we've seen how that messaging entity has operated in other contexts. When people post poo poo from RT or places like it, and especially when they try to hide it, this should be called out and people like Cerepol can find the original, less poo poo, source of information. Now this is the part where I point out that AFP is also a state-owned enterprise. There's a whole additional analysis that can be done on its methods, history, composition, motives, etc, contrasting them with Russian state media. But, as I previously said, our resources for the allocation of certainty are limited, I haven't spent as much time studying AFP, and I don't like pretending that you're a serious poster. Suffice to say that AFP has few of the traits of message manipulation that RT does. It uses a different composition style, has a different audience, different governing rules, and a different business model.They are, on all subjects, better than RT, and on some subjects, a mostly trustworthy source, whose known issues primarily involve their general organization as a wire service and inconsistencies in their style in published messages. I still don't like them very much because they're state-owned and I tend to look for parallel coverage as a result, but there it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
If the Venezuelan military does oust Maduro, I kind of hope they just take power for themselves and kick Guaido out, just so that he feels the sting of betrayal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:If the Venezuelan military does oust Maduro, I kind of hope they just take power for themselves and kick Guaido out, just so that he feels the sting of betrayal. I sure as hell don't because that would be an awful outcome that would negatively impact millions of people!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
Yeah, that hope is definitely coming from the devil whispering in my ear part of me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
My devil whispering in my ear part of me wants a deposed Maduro to appear on The Biggest Loser.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 19:18
|
|
|
In case anyone didn't click this since Jose is a terrible shitposter and bad at even describing his own links, it's actually quite interesting and worth highlighting: https://medium.com/@justin.emery/the-tienditas-bridge-blockade-f240728fe5f7 You can also clearly see on Google Maps that the fencing and concrete blocks have been there for a long time, e.g. on Google Earth's most recent dated image from July 6, 2018 has fences are there, and the fences were there in older images too (e.g. Jan 2018) and there has been a barricade there -- on the Colombian side -- the entire time since the bridge was completed in 2015. The current fence dates from August 2017 which was sometime after they painted the white stripes on the lanes. However, what Justin Emery doesn't discuss is that the trucks are new, and the trucks must have been brought there by the Venezuelans. The fence is indeed set up by the Colombians and it appears to exactly at the national border (note that Google Maps does NOT do borders 100% correctly; the border is Rio Tachira) and the trucks are (a) on the Venezuelan side of the border, (b) have been set up there sometime in the past 6 months (probably they were put up within the past couple weeks, but this is hard to corroborate). That said, the Pompeo story is largely bullshit since that bridge was never open, but it's worth noting that the Venezuelan government did also put their own block there too, and quite recently, for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 19:25
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Comparing the bbc to Russia times. Really? One man's "public broadcaster" is another man's "state-run media"
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I know you know this and are being disingenuous, but for the benefit of others, the entirety of the original AFP message is the substance of the original message. The selection and framing of a narrower "substance", the selection of meaning, is an act by the recipient and, in this case, also the mediating entity acting upon the message. All changes to the original message's content in the course of being reconstructed as a new message by RT are deliberate. Pushing the aid references down in the RT article (versus their direct reference in the third paragraph, and general framing in other parts of the AFP story) is a deliberate choice to get readers to disregard this part of the message. To be clear, there are a ton of much more obvious manipulative moves in the article, from the use of scare quotes to the image selection to the use of interstitial story links, to the order of clauses. So you don't have any comment on the actual substance. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
Saladman posted:In case anyone didn't click this since Jose is a terrible shitposter and bad at even describing his own links, it's actually quite interesting and worth highlighting: Lol a single poster engaged with me when I showed that there have been effective sanctions on Venezuela since 2015 due to it being considered a threat to national security and you call me a terrible poo poo poster
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:09 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/marcorubio/stat...ingawful.com%2F
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2019 20:26
|
|