Ship of Fools: Facebook and arguing against propoganda

Thread: Facebook and arguing against propoganda Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025362

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

A friend posted one of those photos which has two pictures on it purporting to make a fair comparison which totally isn't. I normally just ignore, in this case I challenged, and partly that was because I knew that if I did not and another friend saw it there would be fireworks.

However I am well aware that commenting even negatively on such images brings them to more people's attention.

How should one handle well such situation? Does one challenge? Does one ignore? unfriend? Deliberately go and support campaign groups that say the opposite on Facebook?

Jengie

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

Depends on the post and the poster. Often times when I do I will use snopes.com to refute something that is being said.

The ones that get me are those those "If you love Jesus, share (ignore, if you don't)."

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

(sigh) I always argue, and that's not working out so well for me. Pretty much any time you challenge them, no matter what data/evidence you offer, it will just be labeled "biased". I once challenged one of those ubiquitous "Obama is a secret Muslim" screeds with a posted link to a snopes site showing the particular rumor was untrue, only to have a pastor-- a pastor-- insist that it was true because "I was there"-- in this case, in a supposed "secret prayer meeting with Muslim clergy. Really? Really? You, a relatively obscure Christian pastor, were the single Christian invited to a secret Muslim prayer meeting in the White House? Really? Hmmmm... who to believe, who to believe...

But the arguing isn't working well for me, mostly gets me worked up and angry, and strains relationships. So don't follow my example. I'm looking forward to seeing if anyone has some middle ground between doing nothing and engaging the trolls.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

I do not expect to convince anyone, but simply present them with what evidence I have at hand. After that, it is an exercise in free will for them.

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

Almost always ignore, because life is too short (he says, spending his afternoon sitting on the sofa watching TV, and posting on the ship).

I will only comment if I can make some sarky point - like a recent one illustrating Jesus as a blond white blue-eyed man. if they are pedaling something obviously wrong, I would hope people I know have more sense than to believe it; if they are more commentary, then they probably make a valid point.

The thing is, you can't correct everything that is wrong on the internet. What is more, you cannot let yourself be wound up by them all, or you will go crazy.

Truth is, there have always been complete idiots out there. The internet just gives them an ability to be idiots to a wider audience.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

I used to respond by quoting and citing Snopes, but -

1. Snopes made that harder to do because you can't copy/paste from their writeups anymore, so quoting them is work,

2. Only once did anyone say "thanks, I wondered if it was really true"; all the others ignore my comments or say wacky things like "don't you care about your reputation among Christians?"

3. I get cut off from their future communications.

I'm not on FB yet, it's emails. I've learned if I want these people in my life at all, I have to ignore their nonsense, and be thankful the nonsense is only on line, I rarely hear the topics in face to face conversation.

Posted by Jack the Lass (# 3415) on :

As with many here, I tend to take it on a case by case basis. Sometimes I will link to the relevant snopes page, particularly if something is dangerous (the current one going around about coughing every couple of seconds if you have a heart attack being a case in point). Sometimes I roll my eyes and ignore. Sometimes I say something sarky. I've not 'unfriended' someone yet, but there are a few people I've come close with, and it might be that another link is what tips me over the edge.

It does make me wonder how otherwise sensible people seem to fall for every loony link, particularly when they're MOSTLY IN CAPS with millions of !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!s. I'm sure if they saw it in an email they'd know straight away it was a scam, what is it about being on someone's facebook status that makes them click 'share' without engaging brain?

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

I don't like being told what to do, so if the link says 'You MUST share this!!!' then I just ignore. But some of the ones which play on people's gullibility or sympathy, I usually type 'Have you checked on Snopes?' in the comment section - let them do the actual work.

There has been a spate of 'Missing Person' links recently - the few I've looked up have shown that, if true, the person was found quite a while ago, but the message keeps being shared long after the event. It doesn't take more than a few seconds for people to check.

Sometimes, there have been some very surprising 'likes' and 'shares' - out of character with what I know about the person - and I have wondered in those cases whether someone's account has been compromised??

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Right, for a Urban Myth I will quite often check Snopes especially if computer related.

The "post this if... " are just emotional blackmail most of the time. I occasionally respond with things such as this. I had a run in recently with a friend which sent one that basically said "Forward this to your friends, I know what to think if I do not get this back". She obviously had not read it as I wrote back saying I do not forward those sort of letters because her reply was "you are still my friend aren't you?" yes and if you had not threatened to conclude the opposite I would not have bothered replying.

I also ignore a lot of error.

What happened here was the reposting of blatant tabloid propaganda by someone who should have known better. I challenged it and got "Oh its good to talk about these things".

So my answer is not when to respond, but give that you have decided that you can not let someone post something and not respond with integrity. Look see it as tolerating misogyny by silence if you do. How best to respond?

Jengie

Posted by Vulpior (# 12744) on :

I check Snopes quite often and reply. I almost always jump on any form of chain email, especially 'virus' warnings. If people have left others in the email chain visible through forwarding then my reply includes all those people. I suppose I probably let quite a bit of stuff go by on Facebook, but then I don't sit glued to my news feed!

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

The one I keep seeing is about the Blackhawk Battalion, which did take heavy casualties in Afghanistan back in 2010, but the way it is worded it sounds as if it happened just yesterday. The Battalion rotated out of Afghanistan in 2011; and, to my knowledge, is not scheduled to go back in.

But the implication is if you don't share this--or don't pray for them--you are not American or Christian.

Another type that gets to me is the ones that say we are trying to get a million likes for someone or some cause. Wish there was an unlike button from time to time.

Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :

Of course, if you encounter a real nutter, like the Grandad's cousin, then you're told that Snopes is in the same cabal as the Illuminati or the bunch of Muslims who control Obama (sic).

Said cousin had a serious fall and required major brain surgery, so the Grandad discounts his wilder ravings, but we enjoy his occasional real gem, like the orchestral flash crowds on YouTube.

GG

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

I ignore most of the propaganda stuff a couple of my facebook friends post, but I post propaganda stuff of my own to counter-purpose.

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :

Just another reason why i don't do Facebook

Posted by AmyBo (# 15040) on :

I've learned to block the crazy right-wing uncle's misogynistic posts, because why bother? and ignore the young idiot cousins' stupidity, same as I would at a family gathering. The truly hateful stuff coming from the sane branches of the family tree gets a quick post along the lines of that's bigoted, so they at least know where I stand. Friends don't post stupid stuff, that's why they're my friends.

Posted by Freddy (# 365) on :

As a pastor I thought it would be a good idea to friend as many people in the congregation as I could to keep in touch. So I have about 800 friends and their opinions and activities are pretty entertaining. It does, however, leave me in a tricky position when it comes to trying to "correct" anyone.

I enjoy it because you learn so much about things that are happening with people, But it is also surprising to realize how many unusual causes and opinions, in all directions, people embrace.

Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on :

I would rarely bother commenting. If a close friend put up something that I have diametrically opposed views on, which did happen last year, then the reason why I am friendly with them outweighs the desire to "correct" them.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Yes but when do you stop ignoring:

blatant racisim
misogyny
anti-semitism
when it puts someones life at risk
etc

Jengie

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

For me it's a question of how likely someone is to be hurt--usually emotionally but not necessarily--by the thing in question.

Posted by Freddy (# 365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Yes but when do you stop ignoring:
blatant racisim
misogyny
anti-semitism
when it puts someones life at risk
etc
Jengie

I don't see that kind of thing. The ones I get are pushing causes like nutritional fads, objections to some governmental action or policy, pro-life, pro-choice, various philosophies, yoga, stop-bullying, etc.

Few of them are especially troubling in themselves, but become tiring if they are not about things that especially appeal to me.

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

I just violated my own principles and commented on most of the drivel that someone else posted. I feel dirty now. [Hot and Hormonal]

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

It's always possible to click 'Hide from News Feed' which to me is the equivalent of pressing the TV off-switch when it's a programme I don't like.

Posted by Drifting Star (# 12799) on :

I use Social Fixer, which (amongst many, many other things) allows you to set up filters that put certain posts into their own tabs within Facebook, so you can ignore them.

I set it up because at one time so many friends were posting the same links to events on St Pixels that didn't interest me the first time I saw them.

It's also invaluable for filtering out posts made when people have their tweets posted automatically on Facebook (a pet hate of mine, especially where I follow the person on Twitter as well - if you can't be bothered to make things appropriate to each medium, stop using one of them!)

At one point a couple of friends were posting lots of Youtube videos to show what they were listening to - up to a dozen in an evening - so videos have their own tab, and I only look at them if I feel like it.

During elections in the UK and the US I filtered out election propaganda of all flavours - although the only time I have ever de-friended anyone was the result of way too much right wing US posting.

You can filter out a type of post, or posts containing a certain word or phrase.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Is sheltering yourself from this sort of thing a good idea, or does it create a society where people with such views are never challenged? In other words a society where it is fine to hold view that is strongly repulsive and not expect to be challenged over it?

Jengie

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

I think it's merely exercising reader choice, in the same way as at a library there are thousands of books on offer but we make a limited choice based on interest / need to know. Facebook throws a whole gamut of images / information / life stories at you, so we have to make choices.

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :

It's not just Christian stuff though. For a full day there was thing we had to share (But I didn't) about the poor little 8 year old girl (with picture) who was killed running in the marathon. Firstly it wasn't a girl and secondly kids don't run in the Boston marathon. But there it was, on Facebook. Grrrrr

Posted by churchgeek (# 5557) on :

I don't usually comment on others' posts unless there's something that really needs debunking, then I try to post a link to snopes or something. Once when I did that, my friend just deleted my comments and left her post up with all the comments by people who agreed with it intact (in this case, it was claims about the "real" meaning of "God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen"). Oh well.

But I get a lot of my right-wing friends arguing with anything liberal that I post, and many of them never interact with me in any other way on facebook (which is our only interaction anymore - people I went to high school with, e.g.). My policy is to not "unfriend" anyone over stuff like that. But it does get tiring.

Posted by Beautiful Dreamer (# 10880) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
It's always possible to click 'Hide from News Feed' which to me is the equivalent of pressing the TV off-switch when it's a programme I don't like.

I do this all the time. Also, I have it set up where each 'hide' allows me to change what materials I see from that particular person. I have some friends who are very political and seem to always be posting some new photo or propaganda...I've had to adjust my settings so that I only see certain kinds of updates from them (life events, etc) because their 'soapbox-ing' was drowning out everything else. Very, very useful.

I might occasionally re-post something if it's funny, like 'what would your first four words be if you woke up next to me in jail' or if I find something particularly meaningful. I don't respond to those, 'post if you really believe in Jesus/are my friend/etc' stuff because I don't have anything to prove and that's pretty much what they're asking you to do. I liken them to an 'ultimatum', which I also do not respond well to.

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
I don't usually comment on others' posts unless there's something that really needs debunking, then I try to post a link to snopes or something. Once when I did that, my friend just deleted my comments and left her post up with all the comments by people who agreed with it intact (in this case, it was claims about the "real" meaning of "God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen"). Oh well.

Now you've got me driven mad with curiosity about the secret message of God Rest Ye Merry. Google is not helping here.

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

OK, I just snapped and responded to what I thought was a bigoted Facebook post with what I thought was a well-reasoned response. 99% of the time I hide or scroll past and avoid the temptation, but this time I did get sucked in.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

This isn't exactly propaganda but I'm involved in a FB argument about an article that was posted about PE (Physical Education) in the United States. I challenged my disputant thus: rather than just say "this isn't a good argument," lay out the argument and say what's bad about it.

Apparently that is beyond her abilities. What she has done is gone through the article sentence by sentence and either made a belittling comment on, or attached the names of informal logical fallacies to, each one. Regardless of whether that particular sentence had anything to do with the argument at all. (E.g. a sentence introducing the subject of dodge-ball--not decrying it, not deconstructing it, just introducing it--is called a "straw man" for some reason I am unable to fathom.) Going back through it sentence by sentence will be agonizing, and I'm not sure what good it will do since she seems incapable of understanding the idea of a logical train of thought anyway.

Thanks for listening.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Going back through it sentence by sentence will be agonizing, and I'm not sure what good it will do since she seems incapable of understanding the idea of a logical train of thought anyway.

Have you considered just taking one or two items and having it out over them before going on to a couple of more? There's no need to break a sweat over it. If you drink beer or coffee and you spend more time than it takes to drink half of either, well, like I saw on a hell thread, "sod it, what's the point".

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

I've already reached the "sod it" stage just from reading her bullshit.

Can I just say how much I appreciate the level of conversation and debate on the Ship? Anywhere else on the internet is a crap shoot with loaded dice as to whether you will find somebody who really knows how to hash over a disagreement in a logical manner. On the Ship your odds skyrocket.

[ 11. May 2013, 03:18: Message edited by: mousethief ]

Posted by Grammatica (# 13248) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:

quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
I don't usually comment on others' posts unless there's something that really needs debunking, then I try to post a link to snopes or something. Once when I did that, my friend just deleted my comments and left her post up with all the comments by people who agreed with it intact (in this case, it was claims about the "real" meaning of "God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen"). Oh well.
Now you've got me driven mad with curiosity about the secret message of God Rest Ye Merry. Google is not helping here.

Yes, please. Inquiring minds, &c.

Posted by Grits (# 4169) on :

I ignore, because I don't think that's the purpose of Facebook -- at least, for me it isn't. I view Facebook as a social media tool, and all I really care to see and read is what my "friends" are up to. I don't care to see recipes, cute puppies, political statements, deep thoughts-type posters. I just want to see your kids, hear about your latest adventure, know how your folks are doing, etc. It is about "friends", and friends shouldn't have friends who post crap. So I suck it up and just scroll past all the ignorant, inflamatory and completely unfounded political agenda drivel, because if I unfriend you because of that, I may miss something later that is really meaningful to our relationship. It's a small price to pay.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
I ignore, because I don't think that's the purpose of Facebook -- at least, for me it isn't. I view Facebook as a social media tool, and all I really care to see and read is what my "friends" are up to. I don't care to see recipes, cute puppies, political statements, deep thoughts-type posters. I just want to see your kids, hear about your latest adventure, know how your folks are doing, etc. It is about "friends", and friends shouldn't have friends who post crap. So I suck it up and just scroll past all the ignorant, inflamatory and completely unfounded political agenda drivel, because if I unfriend you because of that, I may miss something later that is really meaningful to our relationship. It's a small price to pay.

Ditto. FB is for catching up with friend's news, I tend to skim the other stuff. Knowing what conversational topics to avoid with certain friends is very helpful. [Biased]

Tubbs

[ 12. May 2013, 17:53: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on :

Like others on here, I'm selective regarding who I have on my newsfeed. Out of 100+ 'friends', only 16 are on my newsfeed. Partly for practical purposes, and partly for my sanity. I find Twitter more annoying in this regard as if you follow someone, you have no choice but to get all their postings. If I didn't follow particular people, it would create a lot of hassle for me but their self absorption and belief that everyone needs to know everyone of their thoughts is astounding. And as for the updates with just enough ambiguity to rouse the 'You alright hun, text me hun' brigade..... [Mad]

Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :

If a "friend" can't take gentle and polite correction, he's not much of a friend.

I once thus gently corrected a friend (who I knew in real life) . . . and he deleted my comment. I later unfriended him for that and other reasons. We still get along fine in real life, but I found out too much of what kind of man he really is and where I stand with him. So things remain polite between us, and that's all.

Perhaps that should be a warning against correcting other's propaganda. But it's probably good that I found out his character sooner rather than later.

But, yeah, the simplest thing is to ignore. There are many venues to press your views, including your own FB page.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

It's a couple of months now since I gave up facebook. I have met friends in RL far more often and had great Skype face to face conversations with far flung friends and family.

I am find I'm much more relaxed with a great deal less nonsense flitting through my brain. I'm an early adopter and was on FB from the beginning but I really don't miss it.

I'm learning German in the time saved.

[Big Grin]

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yonatan:
I find Twitter more annoying in this regard as if you follow someone, you have no choice but to get all their postings.

Twitter lost me with the first ad I saw about it. There was a father tweeting, twitting, whatever, "I am sitting on the patio".

quote:
If I didn't follow particular people, it would create a lot of hassle for me but their self absorption and belief that everyone needs to know everyone of their thoughts is astounding.

If you are looking for thoughts, don't go to facebook. Go to Jack Handy. Once he thinks deeply, there's nothing left to be thought.

Posted by Yonatan (# 11091) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
If you are looking for thoughts, don't go to facebook. Go to Jack Handy. Once he thinks deeply, there's nothing left to be thought.

Good Lord! It's like Diet Zen!

Posted by Beautiful Dreamer (# 10880) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yonatan:
Like others on here, I'm selective regarding who I have on my newsfeed. Out of 100+ 'friends', only 16 are on my newsfeed. Partly for practical purposes, and partly for my sanity. I find Twitter more annoying in this regard as if you follow someone, you have no choice but to get all their postings. If I didn't follow particular people, it would create a lot of hassle for me but their self absorption and belief that everyone needs to know everyone of their thoughts is astounding. And as for the updates with just enough ambiguity to rouse the 'You alright hun, text me hun' brigade.....

That's one reason I love the ability to choose what sorts of updates I get from some people. I also play a lot of games and know people from different places (school, online, etc), so I will use a 'sorting' process to put my friends into 'lists' and then indicate which friends I want to see what from. Very, very useful.

I know what you mean re: vague statuses that seem to be for attention. Some of them are *just* this side of annoying.

Sometimes the vague and ambiguous statuses can be interesting, though...like when my sister was going through some issues, she quoted Nine Inch Nails lyrics. I was one of the few people who responded in kind and knew what she was doing. I've done the 'song lyrics' thing too, because I love music and sometimes my favorite songs can say what I'm thinking much better than I can.

Sometimes it's just fun to see who will fill in the blanks. For instance, I'll post a line like, 'are you pondering what I'm pondering?' from Pinky and the Brain to see what some of my other friends who are fans come up with...'I think so, Brain, but it's your turn to wear the tutu." [Smile]

But then, silly things like this might turn some people off.

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :

It's very strange when you have a group of friends all conversing and one person has used blocks. It then appears as if a ghost is present - you can read people's replies to that person but not what they are saying themselves. It can lead to some quite hilarious conversations but also rather freaky at times. Wooo-ooo [Ultra confused]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0