the media literacy thread

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > the media literacy thread

«‹›9 »

aw frig aw dang it: Jun 1, 2018

gauntanamo bae posted:

vote

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 8, 2024 13:46

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

Toph Bei Fong posted:

op the only media literacy that you need to know is that the Holy Qur'an is infallible and true

this - but the Holy Bible

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:44

docbeard: Jul 19, 2011

speng31b posted:

you face two hitlers. One only tells the truth and one only lies. One hitler is calm and the other's heart is filled with fury. You must reveal the calm hitler with only a single post.... what do you do?

"What would your fellow Hitler say if I said the economy sucked"

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:47

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

Al! posted:

whats it about?

Part 1: What is media literacy? :d:

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It�s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let�s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium�s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some�detailed�children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn�t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It�s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn�t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he�d included a short message at the top of his post saying �I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas��it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn�t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don�t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you�re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that �mediates� the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What�s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper�s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format�and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it�s not just about understanding how the �news media� operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:48

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It�s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let�s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium�s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some�detailed�children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn�t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It�s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn�t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he�d included a short message at the top of his post saying �I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas��it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn�t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don�t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you�re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that �mediates� the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What�s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper�s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format�and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it�s not just about understanding how the �news media� operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

didnt read

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:49

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

lobster shirt posted:

opening up a large treasure chest full of news today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOwv1p-nAWQ

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:50

Mr Hootington: Jul 24, 2008; Can't post for 13 hours!

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It’s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let’s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium’s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some…detailed…children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn’t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It’s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn’t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he’d included a short message at the top of his post saying “I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas”…it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn’t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don’t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you’re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that “mediates” the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What’s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper’s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format…and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it’s not just about understanding how the “news media” operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

This

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:50

Lib and let die: Aug 26, 2004

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It’s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let’s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium’s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some…detailed…children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn’t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It’s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn’t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he’d included a short message at the top of his post saying “I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas”…it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn’t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don’t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you’re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that “mediates” the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What’s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper’s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format…and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it’s not just about understanding how the “news media” operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:51

slave to my cravings: Mar 1, 2007; Got my mind on doritos and doritos on my mind.

cool black guy making a media cliteracy thread where he talks about the best way to eat pussy

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:53

Al!: Apr 2, 2010

seems like a bad example because they got banned for the pony porn and misreading the post was a thin excuse

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:54

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

Ohtori Akio posted:

didnt read

Part 2: The Rhetorical Situation :d:

One useful way to understand any given media source is a framework called "The Rhetorical Situation". This framework was developed to develop and analyze persuasive messages, but it's also great for just improving critical thinking about media. In any situation where communication is happening, each person communicating has three factors to consider.

Exigence (i.e. goal)
The speaker has a particular goal in mind. This goal could be specific political reform, the overthrow of the capitalist state, feeling better about themselves, getting laid, anything. The important thing is that, as covered in the first part, the goal is not the same as the message. When a right-wing pundit wants to fearmonger about a minority, they rarely say �you should be afraid of this minority�. They tell a story about some made-up atrocity that motivates that fear in their audience.

Your goal is not the same as what you are trying to communicate, and it�s not the same as what you want your audience to believe, nor is it the same as the text of the message you send (yes, this is the same lesson as in Part 1).

Audience
Messages need to be written in terms and forms that convey their intended content to a specific audience. If you�re speaking to one person or to a well-defined group and the situation is simple, you can �tailor� your message specifically based on what you know about them. In most situations, though, there are multiple audiences, including both intended and unintended audiences whose response still matters and can influence whether or not your goals are achieved.

Balancing how different audiences will respond to a message becomes more difficult as the number of audiences becomes more diverse. Coded language (like racist dogwhistles, speaking in Spanish, or references to the specific slogans of a protest movement) let the speaker try to split their message�s interpretation for different audiences. Most of the time, though, they�re stuck crafting a message that will offend or appeal to some set of different audiences, and try to reach a balance of different statements, appealing to different audiences, such that their general goals are achieved. If a speech seems tone-deaf, well, it may just not be tuned for your ears. That doesn�t mean it�s necessarily badly composed.
All of this is made infinitely harder by the fact that almost all audiences are now mediated; audiences they are only getting message after it passes through someone else�s hands.

Constraints
Mediators (like the press) are one example of constraints on a message- limitations of format, sources of noise (another concept from Part 1) or misinterpretation, limited time or money or access, that can restrict the speaker�s options. Each of these constraints can screw up an otherwise well-designed message, but the biggest constraint, the greatest restriction, in most modern communication settings, is attention. Everyone involved in communication is trying to figure out how to get their audience to read, to click through, and to share- and that distorts both the initial message, and every other medium or media that it passes through. It�s incredibly hard to get nuance or details through to an audience that isn�t somehow motivated to stick around- and right now most online media just intensifies this constraint.

Exercise 1
Here�s a practice problem to get a feel for what this entails.

Congratulations. You�re Joe Biden. You have to give your first state of the union speech, and Peter Thiel just drained all the blood out of your speechwriter. It�s all on you now, and your speech is in an hour. What�s your goal? What are your different audiences? What are the constraints on your speech? What do you say?

�Why am I not hearing about x?!�
Politicians do not actually control the media- and media attention is an incredibly fickle constraint. There is a constant churn of attempts to get and maintain media attention, and the media ecosystem is more fragmented than ever. The vast majority of press announcements, even from the white house, do not get billing even in conventional press. Mediated, self-reinforced selection newsfeeds like twitter give an even more limited picture. When you blame someone for �not talking about� something, bear in mind that they may actually be talking about that thing- you�re just not hearing about it because your sources of information aren�t providing it to you. If you find yourself asking this question, check to see if the politician or- well, let�s be real, it�s usually the democrats that get blamed for this- the democrats are actually talking about it, and it�s just not getting covered. And understand that �well they should talk about it more� usually means they get to do, or even just talk about, other things less�and you�re not the only person with the only priorities that they need to reach. Good governance does not attract attention like a fat man riding an escalator does. Find better, more direct sources that will tell you more about what is going on. Stop watching the fat man on the escalator.

Consider the message creator�s rhetorical situation
If you think someone is doing or saying something horrible and insane, ask yourself why they are doing it. People are rarely completely irrational, especially in communication. There is usually some motivation, even if it is self-interested or unethical. If your answer requires a conspiracy or some sort of global all-encompassing evil, or if you just don�t have any information that tells you why, your understanding of the situation is incomplete- and the current information source you are using to understand the situation is probably misleading you. Maybe the speaker can�t talk about the subject of a deliberation without derailing it, or there�s a liability issue. Maybe they�re trying to reach out to someone who doesn�t share your values, but whose support is vital to their goals. Maybe they are monstrous and psychotic, but they�re usually gonna have some underlying reason beyond their psychosis! Putting yourself in the shoes of the speaker and thinking through their rhetorical situation will let you start to view any message they put out more critically.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:55

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

crepeface posted:

Part 2: The Rhetorical Situation
One useful way to understand any given media source is a framework called "The Rhetorical Situation". This framework was developed to develop and analyze persuasive messages, but it's also great for just improving critical thinking about media. In any situation where communication is happening, each person communicating has three factors to consider.

Exigence (i.e. goal)
The speaker has a particular goal in mind. This goal could be specific political reform, the overthrow of the capitalist state, feeling better about themselves, getting laid, anything. The important thing is that, as covered in the first part, the goal is not the same as the message. When a right-wing pundit wants to fearmonger about a minority, they rarely say �you should be afraid of this minority�. They tell a story about some made-up atrocity that motivates that fear in their audience.

Your goal is not the same as what you are trying to communicate, and it�s not the same as what you want your audience to believe, nor is it the same as the text of the message you send (yes, this is the same lesson as in Part 1).

Audience
Messages need to be written in terms and forms that convey their intended content to a specific audience. If you�re speaking to one person or to a well-defined group and the situation is simple, you can �tailor� your message specifically based on what you know about them. In most situations, though, there are multiple audiences, including both intended and unintended audiences whose response still matters and can influence whether or not your goals are achieved.

Balancing how different audiences will respond to a message becomes more difficult as the number of audiences becomes more diverse. Coded language (like racist dogwhistles, speaking in Spanish, or references to the specific slogans of a protest movement) let the speaker try to split their message�s interpretation for different audiences. Most of the time, though, they�re stuck crafting a message that will offend or appeal to some set of different audiences, and try to reach a balance of different statements, appealing to different audiences, such that their general goals are achieved. If a speech seems tone-deaf, well, it may just not be tuned for your ears. That doesn�t mean it�s necessarily badly composed.
All of this is made infinitely harder by the fact that almost all audiences are now mediated; audiences they are only getting message after it passes through someone else�s hands.

Constraints
Mediators (like the press) are one example of constraints on a message- limitations of format, sources of noise (another concept from Part 1) or misinterpretation, limited time or money or access, that can restrict the speaker�s options. Each of these constraints can screw up an otherwise well-designed message, but the biggest constraint, the greatest restriction, in most modern communication settings, is attention. Everyone involved in communication is trying to figure out how to get their audience to read, to click through, and to share- and that distorts both the initial message, and every other medium or media that it passes through. It�s incredibly hard to get nuance or details through to an audience that isn�t somehow motivated to stick around- and right now most online media just intensifies this constraint.

Exercise 1
Here�s a practice problem to get a feel for what this entails.

Congratulations. You�re Joe Biden. You have to give your first state of the union speech, and Peter Thiel just drained all the blood out of your speechwriter. It�s all on you now, and your speech is in an hour. What�s your goal? What are your different audiences? What are the constraints on your speech? What do you say?

�Why am I not hearing about x?!�
Politicians do not actually control the media- and media attention is an incredibly fickle constraint. There is a constant churn of attempts to get and maintain media attention, and the media ecosystem is more fragmented than ever. The vast majority of press announcements, even from the white house, do not get billing even in conventional press. Mediated, self-reinforced selection newsfeeds like twitter give an even more limited picture. When you blame someone for �not talking about� something, bear in mind that they may actually be talking about that thing- you�re just not hearing about it because your sources of information aren�t providing it to you. If you find yourself asking this question, check to see if the politician or- well, let�s be real, it�s usually the democrats that get blamed for this- the democrats are actually talking about it, and it�s just not getting covered. And understand that �well they should talk about it more� usually means they get to do, or even just talk about, other things less�and you�re not the only person with the only priorities that they need to reach. Good governance does not attract attention like a fat man riding an escalator does. Find better, more direct sources that will tell you more about what is going on. Stop watching the fat man on the escalator.

Consider the message creator�s rhetorical situation
If you think someone is doing or saying something horrible and insane, ask yourself why they are doing it. People are rarely completely irrational, especially in communication. There is usually some motivation, even if it is self-interested or unethical. If your answer requires a conspiracy or some sort of global all-encompassing evil, or if you just don�t have any information that tells you why, your understanding of the situation is incomplete- and the current information source you are using to understand the situation is probably misleading you. Maybe the speaker can�t talk about the subject of a deliberation without derailing it, or there�s a liability issue. Maybe they�re trying to reach out to someone who doesn�t share your values, but whose support is vital to their goals. Maybe they are monstrous and psychotic, but they�re usually gonna have some underlying reason beyond their psychosis! Putting yourself in the shoes of the speaker and thinking through their rhetorical situation will let you start to view any message they put out more critically.

eat my butte

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:55

tristeham: Jul 31, 2022

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It�s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let�s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium�s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some�detailed�children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn�t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It�s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn�t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he�d included a short message at the top of his post saying �I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas��it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn�t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don�t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you�re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that �mediates� the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What�s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper�s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format�and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it�s not just about understanding how the �news media� operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

huh

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:57

Pepe Silvia Browne: Jan 1, 2007

shannon and weaver is a classic

# ? Mar 12, 2024 16:57

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

HallelujahLee posted:

eat my butte

What�s a Lede?
The lede is the main point or draw of an article- the material that is often converted or summarized into the headline. The lede is what drives attention- it is sometimes the only, single new piece of information in the article. Everything after the lede is intended to contextualize that information and help the audience process it. Depending on editorial practices, it is often normal to expect an audience to read the later material. This expects the audience to recognize when the contextualizing material changes how the lede should be interpreted- especially where the lede is a quote about someone claiming something. It�s good practice to put as much immediate context for a lede statement as possible as close to the top of the article as possible, usually in a �nut graf�- the most important context in a nutshell.

�Cletus safari� stories (stories interviewing people with offensive, �backwards� views) are frequently just rubbernecking at bigotry, but often they provide context that is intended to explain how the Cletuses involved arrived at their position�.and some of them are actually designed to be stories about how the original source is a piece of racist garbage with no excuses or redeeming qualities. A media source, especially a print one, expecting their reader to read the entire article is not inherently bad media.

Alternately, lovely media will bury contradictory information in the supporting material in order to promote the idea that the lede is true. This is usually easier to determine on close reading, but a lot depends on your willingness to spend the effort to apply scrutiny- even if the story �feels� true and supports what you were already thinking.

Track cited sources
Media should provide sources. Often if it�s not anonymous, they even give links back to their original source- and even if they don�t, they may give enough context that you can try to find information about that source. Get in the habit of checking the original source, and using that source (which often has much more context) when trying to understand an article.

Interpret usage of sources
When reading any message, ask yourself: Who are the sources? What order are the sources presented in? How do decisions about what sources are quoted, and how, influence my perception of the claims in the story?
This recent story talking about how the US is withholding the AstraZeneca vaccine from other nations is citing entirely to AstraZeneca spokespeople. This tells you something about how the story was formed and how it may be biased.

Authors do not write titles, and titles change
In almost all outlets, a separate staffer writes an article�s title, and nowadays the title may change based on A/B testing (different people get different titles, and eventually the editor takes whichever title was most popular and applies it to all copies of the article). This goes septuple for social media posts. Always click through and read the article. The title is often inaccurate if not misleading- and that�s due to the perversities of the mediating source, not the original text.

"is this an ad"?
Some media, especially online only media, operates principally or in part by reprinting source material from PR wires. This is easy to check. Is it about a new product or study? Does it extensively quote people tied to the subject, and it seems weird that this outlet would have an exclusive interview?

This sort of reporting isn�t inherently unethical, if the PR material is contextualized, or reported as PR material. The new study or product may be news! It�s not propaganda, it�s mediation- hearing about these things, even if they�re promoted, is a part of what you use media for. A large part of what is �news� is reporting what people are doing or saying, even if they�re doing or saying it for money or for press attention.

You�ve got some tools together now, let�s see what you make of them.

Exercise 2
This intercept article came up recently in another thread. Spoiler alert: it is completely full of poo poo. At the same time, it�s very possible that you find its basic message appealing (which is why it showed up in the first place). It makes for a great practice dummy, though, because it�s short and it hyperlinks its sources. So: can you identify the lede, the nut graf, and the twenty-odd ways that it�s misleading nonsense?

This is the basic set of skills you need to practice to parse most media on a surface level. Your goal should be to do it habitually, even when the article doesn't hyperlink its sources or its message just seems obvious.

In the next part we'll get into some of the specific ways that we understand or misunderstand ideas, and how to read the individual sentences and claims of an article in much, much greater detail.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:01

HashtagGirlboss: Jan 4, 2005

Pepe Silvia Browne posted:

shannon and weaver is a classic

Shannon had all the talent. It�s why weaver�s solo career fizzled after like one album

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:02

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

also lmao i didn't realise the original d&d thread literally gave out homework on why a story about how negative opinions on student debt forgiveness were being promoted by think tanks was incorrect

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:04

speng31b: May 8, 2010

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It�s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let�s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium�s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some�detailed�children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn�t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It�s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn�t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he�d included a short message at the top of his post saying �I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas��it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn�t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don�t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you�re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that �mediates� the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What�s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper�s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format�and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it�s not just about understanding how the �news media� operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

wow

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:06

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

crepeface posted:

also lmao i didn't realise the original d&d thread literally gave out homework on why a story about how negative opinions on student debt forgiveness were being promoted by think tanks was incorrect

lol

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:06

Lib and let die: Aug 26, 2004

terminally classroom-brained

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:06

HashtagGirlboss: Jan 4, 2005

Pepe Silvia Browne posted:

shannon and weaver is a classic

I-I I-i-I�m weaver. I believe med lit gets me through the ni-ight

I-I I-I-I�m weaver. Shannon knows the sources are alright

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:08

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

crepeface posted:

also lmao i didn't realise the original d&d thread literally gave out homework on why a story about how negative opinions on student debt forgiveness were being promoted by think tanks was incorrect

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1tyybVuSBU

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:14

my_custom_username: Nov 30, 2023

RealityWarCriminal posted:

https://twitter.com/literaturedevil/status/1765729927976890814

Why have people gotten so loving annoying about Starship Troopers recently

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:18

DaysBefore: Jan 24, 2019

crepeface posted:

Part 1: What is media literacy?

Let's start from the beginning.

This is the Shannon and Weaver Communication Model.

(Note that this is a model of communication. This material will have a few models; the thing about models is they're simplified representations that explain one set of relationships by sacrificing detail elsewhere. I am also simplifying these models, as many of the real ones get very complex.)

Shannon and Weaver is a classic. It�s the foundation of entire fields of theory. But let�s put some flesh on these bones. Why do we care about this?

Example 1
DnD mod GreyJoyBastard loves classic film The Princess Bride, and has always thought it deserves more appreciation. He writes a long, meandering OP in CineD discussing his love of the film, and promoting his idea, an HD re-release shown in theaters.

GJB has a message he wants to convey, but he can't just beam it into people's heads- he has to encode it into a message into a form other people can translate. This post passes through the channel or medium of the forums.

Unfortunately, this medium has a source of noise, or distortion, that warps or limits the content of the message. All communications have sources of noise, but SA has an especially bad one: radium�s code. The post that is ultimately displayed is scrambled.

Several users see the new thread. Among them is Jeffrey of YOSPOS, who sees the post and reads it, decoding it in the context of some�detailed�children's cartoon fanfiction GJB had been posting earlier. He decides he's had enough. GreyJoyBastard is demodded and permabanned.

What have we learned?
First, what you mean isn�t the same as what you say, or what your audience hears. Your ideas or beliefs or intentions have to be converted into a message, which travels through a medium that further distorts its content, and then has to be interpreted by the recipient.

Second, to communicate your meaning, you have to think about how the message will be received. It�s not enough to care passionately about your beliefs. Hell, caring passionately can make it harder to communicate! You need to be able to anticipate how your message will be mediated to construct your message so that it conveys your desired idea and your audience will understand it. GreyJoyBastard didn�t have too much of a chance because of radium, but if he�d included a short message at the top of his post saying �I understand this is not like my usual posting, but I promise this thread is not related to my collection of My Little Pony alternate universe harem novellas��it might have helped. He needed to think about how the forums could screw up his message, and how his target audience doesn�t share his well-known love of 1980s camp cinema and costumed horse romance.

If you don�t actively think about how your message will be mediated and received, and how it relates to your goals, you�re talking to yourself, not others. You're masturbating, not communicating. DPPH is closed. We try to discourage that practice these days.

Third and most importantly, all messages are mediated.
When we usually think of media, we think of getting information from an outside source, like a newspaper, that �mediates� the message. But every medium, every source, selects and influences how a message is shaped and ultimately received.

What�s more, messages are mediated many times over. When you see and post a tweet that contains a link to a news story, the reporter is a mediator for the message- but so is the source for the story, and the way they talked to the reporter, and the editor, and the newspaper�s social media account, and the person who retweets it, and the twitter format�and so are you, the person who posts that tweet on the forums.

When we think of media literacy, then it�s not just about understanding how the �news media� operates. We get information in all kinds of ways, and very little of it is only mediated by reporters. Media literacy is about understanding how the process of communication affects the messages we receive, and how we can better participate in communication, as message creators and receivers.

crepeface posted:

Part 2: The Rhetorical Situation
One useful way to understand any given media source is a framework called "The Rhetorical Situation". This framework was developed to develop and analyze persuasive messages, but it's also great for just improving critical thinking about media. In any situation where communication is happening, each person communicating has three factors to consider.

Exigence (i.e. goal)
The speaker has a particular goal in mind. This goal could be specific political reform, the overthrow of the capitalist state, feeling better about themselves, getting laid, anything. The important thing is that, as covered in the first part, the goal is not the same as the message. When a right-wing pundit wants to fearmonger about a minority, they rarely say �you should be afraid of this minority�. They tell a story about some made-up atrocity that motivates that fear in their audience.

Your goal is not the same as what you are trying to communicate, and it�s not the same as what you want your audience to believe, nor is it the same as the text of the message you send (yes, this is the same lesson as in Part 1).

Audience
Messages need to be written in terms and forms that convey their intended content to a specific audience. If you�re speaking to one person or to a well-defined group and the situation is simple, you can �tailor� your message specifically based on what you know about them. In most situations, though, there are multiple audiences, including both intended and unintended audiences whose response still matters and can influence whether or not your goals are achieved.

Balancing how different audiences will respond to a message becomes more difficult as the number of audiences becomes more diverse. Coded language (like racist dogwhistles, speaking in Spanish, or references to the specific slogans of a protest movement) let the speaker try to split their message�s interpretation for different audiences. Most of the time, though, they�re stuck crafting a message that will offend or appeal to some set of different audiences, and try to reach a balance of different statements, appealing to different audiences, such that their general goals are achieved. If a speech seems tone-deaf, well, it may just not be tuned for your ears. That doesn�t mean it�s necessarily badly composed.
All of this is made infinitely harder by the fact that almost all audiences are now mediated; audiences they are only getting message after it passes through someone else�s hands.

Constraints
Mediators (like the press) are one example of constraints on a message- limitations of format, sources of noise (another concept from Part 1) or misinterpretation, limited time or money or access, that can restrict the speaker�s options. Each of these constraints can screw up an otherwise well-designed message, but the biggest constraint, the greatest restriction, in most modern communication settings, is attention. Everyone involved in communication is trying to figure out how to get their audience to read, to click through, and to share- and that distorts both the initial message, and every other medium or media that it passes through. It�s incredibly hard to get nuance or details through to an audience that isn�t somehow motivated to stick around- and right now most online media just intensifies this constraint.

Exercise 1
Here�s a practice problem to get a feel for what this entails.

Congratulations. You�re Joe Biden. You have to give your first state of the union speech, and Peter Thiel just drained all the blood out of your speechwriter. It�s all on you now, and your speech is in an hour. What�s your goal? What are your different audiences? What are the constraints on your speech? What do you say?

�Why am I not hearing about x?!�
Politicians do not actually control the media- and media attention is an incredibly fickle constraint. There is a constant churn of attempts to get and maintain media attention, and the media ecosystem is more fragmented than ever. The vast majority of press announcements, even from the white house, do not get billing even in conventional press. Mediated, self-reinforced selection newsfeeds like twitter give an even more limited picture. When you blame someone for �not talking about� something, bear in mind that they may actually be talking about that thing- you�re just not hearing about it because your sources of information aren�t providing it to you. If you find yourself asking this question, check to see if the politician or- well, let�s be real, it�s usually the democrats that get blamed for this- the democrats are actually talking about it, and it�s just not getting covered. And understand that �well they should talk about it more� usually means they get to do, or even just talk about, other things less�and you�re not the only person with the only priorities that they need to reach. Good governance does not attract attention like a fat man riding an escalator does. Find better, more direct sources that will tell you more about what is going on. Stop watching the fat man on the escalator.

Consider the message creator�s rhetorical situation
If you think someone is doing or saying something horrible and insane, ask yourself why they are doing it. People are rarely completely irrational, especially in communication. There is usually some motivation, even if it is self-interested or unethical. If your answer requires a conspiracy or some sort of global all-encompassing evil, or if you just don�t have any information that tells you why, your understanding of the situation is incomplete- and the current information source you are using to understand the situation is probably misleading you. Maybe the speaker can�t talk about the subject of a deliberation without derailing it, or there�s a liability issue. Maybe they�re trying to reach out to someone who doesn�t share your values, but whose support is vital to their goals. Maybe they are monstrous and psychotic, but they�re usually gonna have some underlying reason beyond their psychosis! Putting yourself in the shoes of the speaker and thinking through their rhetorical situation will let you start to view any message they put out more critically.

crepeface posted:

What�s a Lede?
The lede is the main point or draw of an article- the material that is often converted or summarized into the headline. The lede is what drives attention- it is sometimes the only, single new piece of information in the article. Everything after the lede is intended to contextualize that information and help the audience process it. Depending on editorial practices, it is often normal to expect an audience to read the later material. This expects the audience to recognize when the contextualizing material changes how the lede should be interpreted- especially where the lede is a quote about someone claiming something. It�s good practice to put as much immediate context for a lede statement as possible as close to the top of the article as possible, usually in a �nut graf�- the most important context in a nutshell.

�Cletus safari� stories (stories interviewing people with offensive, �backwards� views) are frequently just rubbernecking at bigotry, but often they provide context that is intended to explain how the Cletuses involved arrived at their position�.and some of them are actually designed to be stories about how the original source is a piece of racist garbage with no excuses or redeeming qualities. A media source, especially a print one, expecting their reader to read the entire article is not inherently bad media.

Alternately, lovely media will bury contradictory information in the supporting material in order to promote the idea that the lede is true. This is usually easier to determine on close reading, but a lot depends on your willingness to spend the effort to apply scrutiny- even if the story �feels� true and supports what you were already thinking.

Track cited sources
Media should provide sources. Often if it�s not anonymous, they even give links back to their original source- and even if they don�t, they may give enough context that you can try to find information about that source. Get in the habit of checking the original source, and using that source (which often has much more context) when trying to understand an article.

Interpret usage of sources
When reading any message, ask yourself: Who are the sources? What order are the sources presented in? How do decisions about what sources are quoted, and how, influence my perception of the claims in the story?
This recent story talking about how the US is withholding the AstraZeneca vaccine from other nations is citing entirely to AstraZeneca spokespeople. This tells you something about how the story was formed and how it may be biased.

Authors do not write titles, and titles change
In almost all outlets, a separate staffer writes an article�s title, and nowadays the title may change based on A/B testing (different people get different titles, and eventually the editor takes whichever title was most popular and applies it to all copies of the article). This goes septuple for social media posts. Always click through and read the article. The title is often inaccurate if not misleading- and that�s due to the perversities of the mediating source, not the original text.

"is this an ad"?
Some media, especially online only media, operates principally or in part by reprinting source material from PR wires. This is easy to check. Is it about a new product or study? Does it extensively quote people tied to the subject, and it seems weird that this outlet would have an exclusive interview?

This sort of reporting isn�t inherently unethical, if the PR material is contextualized, or reported as PR material. The new study or product may be news! It�s not propaganda, it�s mediation- hearing about these things, even if they�re promoted, is a part of what you use media for. A large part of what is �news� is reporting what people are doing or saying, even if they�re doing or saying it for money or for press attention.

You�ve got some tools together now, let�s see what you make of them.

Exercise 2
This intercept article came up recently in another thread. Spoiler alert: it is completely full of poo poo. At the same time, it�s very possible that you find its basic message appealing (which is why it showed up in the first place). It makes for a great practice dummy, though, because it�s short and it hyperlinks its sources. So: can you identify the lede, the nut graf, and the twenty-odd ways that it�s misleading nonsense?

This is the basic set of skills you need to practice to parse most media on a surface level. Your goal should be to do it habitually, even when the article doesn't hyperlink its sources or its message just seems obvious.

In the next part we'll get into some of the specific ways that we understand or misunderstand ideas, and how to read the individual sentences and claims of an article in much, much greater detail.

15,000 words that have literally nothing to say lol. Imagine wasting your life on this poo poo

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:22

Ohtori Akio: Jul 15, 2022

my_custom_username posted:

Why have people gotten so loving annoying about Starship Troopers recently

video game

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:30

Pepe Silvia Browne: Jan 1, 2007

my_custom_username posted:

Why have people gotten so loving annoying about Starship Troopers recently

The last time people talked about starship troopers (1997) we didn't have social media rewarding the most annoying people among us

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:32

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

DaysBefore posted:

15,000 words that have literally nothing to say lol. Imagine wasting your life on this poo poo

Conclusion: Applying critical thought to media, for goons :d:

You are media
When you post on the forums, you are communicating. The posts of others are also communication. Most of the important parts of the material here applies to you as much as to any conventional media source. You can be a channel through which good information enriches the forums, or a stream of unfiltered bullshit and/or propaganda. Hopefully if you�re the latter, as moderation improves, your posting also improves. Or you�ll get banned.

�Think for yourself� doesn�t mean rationalize more
A core issue with many people�s approach to media literacy is they think of it as finding a single, true lens through which to understand information and the world- a rule or worldview or rubric that they can use to decide what sources are good or bad. This is often couched in the language of universal skepticism, or seeing through the �mainstream media.� �I�m skeptical of every source� and "all media is biased" is bullshit. No one can be skeptical of every source equally, and all too often it means rejecting good sources that are just communicating challenging or unappealing information. Taking these positions actually makes a person even more vulnerable to disinformation, because disinfo campaigns actively target such individuals and prey upon their biases. The Intercept article I cited above OANN will both tell you- they will give you the stories no one else will.

Similarly, a single theory (including, or even especially, �crit� theories that provide an overarching narrative telling you what sources are good or bad) will instead steer you toward messages that appeal to you for all the wrong reasons. There�s a reason these posts are a bunch of material pulled from different sources- a toolkit will make you much more intellectually versatile than a single mythological correct way to understand media.

If you agree with something, look harder
You need to apply much stronger criticism to messages that tell you what you want to hear. This includes �Those people I hate are doing things I hate!� messages. You are a target for misleading information, and you are not automatically more resistant to that information just because you believe you are right or rational or a good person. Meaningful messages and statements are richer in information, and leave themselves open to scrutiny. Finding weaknesses or bias in a source doesn�t make it worthless- but it means you have tools to better evaluate it in context. A claim that appears to have no basis for scrutiny, that seems to you to be absolutely and unambiguously, obviously self-evidently true�is bullshit. And a source or ideology that gives you that level of moral certainty will just make it much harder for you to critically evaluate other information with the baggage it gives you.

Don�t read in a comedy way
Media literacy and critical thought is not about becoming a better arguer or finding a position that�s easier to defend. If anything, it�s the exact opposite- it�s about being able to take a position that is more reliant on facts, on details, on nuance, and more amenable to change. Literacy in media requires an understanding of specific outlets and authors, different sources of information, their methods, strengths and weaknesses, so than you can interpret them with greater nuance. These nuances, these specific details, will in turn give you more tools to read media and evaluate sources critically.

Oh my god, log off of Twitter
Are you and your friends getting your news from twitter? You�re hosed in the head. No, seriously, it has hosed you up on levels you cannot recognize. Twitter is brain poison, and the medium is taking every bit as smelly a dump in your brain as every internet-poisoned racist or hot take artist you�ve ever encountered on there. The comedians you follow aren�t more insightful, the journos you follow aren�t giving you inside scoops, and the information you�re getting is virtually never reaching you before everyone else.

The power of twitter to gently caress up brains is not just that it gives you material that you agree with, or makes you angry at things you disagree with. Twitter makes the information it gives you seem as if it reflects the world. Feeds are fishbowls. The tiny, myopic, ultratailored worldview that twitter gives you fills up your vision and gives you the illusion of understanding much larger, more complex issues. That�s the real danger of social media - not just being wrong, but being certain. If you get your information from twitter, if you have an account and log in and use it regularly - or even if you just socialize with a set of people who pass you information from the site, well, they�re just mediators for the exact same phenomenon.

The only solution- the only solution- is to log off. I mean it. Get other sources of information. Actually subscribe to a newspaper, and read parts that aren�t about today�s memes or what other people are discussing in your favored discord server. (I am not going to tell you that you have to read nonfiction books from outside your usual worldview; ask Hieronymous Alloy in TBB for some recs if you want to really excel.) Read about subjects that you know nothing about and that don�t map onto any part of the prior political identity or culture of social media. Develop expertise, and a more nuanced understanding of the world. This is the only thing that will make you even resistant to the epistemic closure that social media encourages. Resistance to propaganda requires a mental framework and ideological underpinnings that are complex and idiosyncratic enough that no propagandist can tailor a message that can pierce all the experience and tools and perspectives you've learned.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:39

Lib and let die: Aug 26, 2004

I AM THE MEDIA

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:41

Al!: Apr 2, 2010

my_custom_username posted:

Why have people gotten so loving annoying about Starship Troopers recently

helldivers 2 created marketplace confusion

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:45

HashtagGirlboss: Jan 4, 2005

Lib and let die posted:

I AM THE MEDIA

You are the intervening substances through which impressions are conveyed to the senses or forces act on objects at a distance?

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:52

FirstnameLastname: Jul 10, 2022; got me 50 ounces out a bird in this bitch

Lib and let die posted:

I AM THE MEDIA

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:53

Harold Fjord: Jan 3, 2004

HashtagGirlboss posted:

You are the intervening substances through which impressions are conveyed to the senses or forces act on objects at a distance?

That's loving right

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:53

HallelujahLee: May 3, 2009

the quintessential dnd freak 15000 words no substance nothing actually said

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:54

gauntanamo bae: Mar 11, 2024

DaysBefore posted:

15,000 words that have literally nothing to say lol. Imagine wasting your life on this poo poo

indistinguishable from chatgpt

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:55

HashtagGirlboss: Jan 4, 2005

gauntanamo bae posted:

indistinguishable from chatgpt

Chatgpt responds to inputs

# ? Mar 12, 2024 17:56

Parakeet vs. Phone: Nov 6, 2009

Al! posted:

helldivers 2 created marketplace confusion

Yeah, Helldivers 2 made its setting Starship Troopers for people who thought Starship Troopers was still a little too subtle, for more direct comedy. A bunch of weirdos are flipping out because they didn't realize that it was a joke. Funny but a little more sad than the dumbest people going "But bugs ugly?" about Starship Troopers.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 18:01

Probably Magic: Oct 9, 2012; Looking cute, feeling cute.

DaysBefore posted:

15,000 words that have literally nothing to say lol. Imagine wasting your life on this poo poo

This stuff is sorta interesting (sort-of) but when he keeps referencing it while arguing Thomas Frank is a cryptofascist as if there's any correlation is when it gets maddening.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 18:01

Probably Magic: Oct 9, 2012; Looking cute, feeling cute.

Like, he gets mad at op-eds for not being honor-bound towards neutral language, but his entire blurb is about how audience and goals will affect message, which he then proceeds to dismiss when it doesn't fit his needs.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 18:02

StashAugustine: Mar 24, 2013; Do not trust in hope- it will betray you! Only faith and hatred sustain.

Yeah the problem is that he does have something to say and it's "anyone who disagree with me is a lunatic"

# ? Mar 12, 2024 18:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 8, 2024 13:46

WampaLord: Jan 14, 2010

crepeface posted:

If you agree with something, look harder
You need to apply much stronger criticism to messages that tell you what you want to hear. This includes �Those people I hate are doing things I hate!� messages. You are a target for misleading information, and you are not automatically more resistant to that information just because you believe you are right or rational or a good person.

Hilarious how much this bit is only meant to apply to people reading "wrong" media (aka leftist takes) and not, say, the New York Times doing all sorts of rhetorical cover for the genocide in Palestine.

# ? Mar 12, 2024 18:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > the media literacy thread

«‹›9 »