I am absolutely BEGGING all of you to not get your political theory exclusively through internet celebrities.
For real. Every news source has an agenda of some type. I suggest foreign news coverage of your countries affairs. Can be a bit more even handed if they don’t have a much skin in the game
Some days I view the Internet as one of the most important technological advances ever made in the history of mankind.
Other days the worst fucking mistake we coulda made next to Furby's.
Fuck.
Between mentioning Russell Brand, Joe Rogan, and Rumble shit feels like bait.
I thought it was ironic? I mean why would anyone listen to a bunch of unqualified podcasters while counting actual news as propoganda lmao
This posting by op is ironic based on their replies, but unfortunately it was probably created unironically, there are a lot of people who actually think like this
Bingo. Probably should've made that more clear.
because people form parasocial connections with podcasters and come to believe that because they "don't like either side", "aren't established news", or are "more real" that they aren't spreading propoganda, even though they're literally opinion shows
I think that's a bit of a stretch. Its entertainment and that's why I watch it. But even my favorite podcasters are very clearly coming from an angle with their opinions. This isn't a secret.
Like, I enjoy watching Hasan. But the first show I watched of his was literally called "AgitProp" lol.
oh no I'm not saying everyone who watches podcasters/streamers thinks this, I'm saying the specific type of person who would make this would think this. Especially from fans of stuff like the bad faith pod I'll hear them say that they like the show because it "doesn't have an agenda" when it obviously does. Similar type of stuff that you hear from breaking points or timcast fans
Oooohh understood. Yeah that makes sense. I thought you were making a sweeping generalization and I got confused. All good.
This infogrpahic feels like propaganda that's in support of the "least propaganda-ish" sources.
I'm surprised Fox isn't at the very bottom of the bottom, since they can't even legally consider themselves "news".
Maybe CNN is just better at it, making propaganda news without obviously lying all the time ... ? Haven't watched either, though (different continent here).
wait why is Tim Pool an anarcho bidenist, who the fuck made this
oh no it just gets dumber the more I look at it
what does it mean when i have no idea who any of these are?
That you aren't terminally online. Congrats!
Who the hell finds Sam Seder toxic?
Oh No! Sam Seder! What A Nightmare!
Steven Crowder does i guess lmao
Vaush bad! Vaush bad!
Unironically.
What's "lost the plot" supposed to mean here?
"Msnbc-lite" obviously
Full disclosure, I have no idea what this is trying to say and it looks like the ramblings of an insane person. But I think some of the conclusions are funny.
Oh thank God, I thought you made this.
I like cnbc's obsession of trains and public transport tho
hasan piker does not belong over there with vaush 😭
Realistically, they are fairly similar. The real crime is saying Hasan is more toxic than Vaush.
Where is NPR? I think there a few more neutralist news sources you may want to look for. I’m with the other guy, internet news only is going to have its own set of biases.
To be clear, this is not my chart. I strongly disagree with like... 95% of it. But news and politics is interesting to me, especially the agendas of the people speaking. So this is really funny to me.
And its not just internet news that has a bias - everything will. Thats fine though, just try to understand the bias.
I don't even wanna know what the person who created this thinks about Ana Kasparian's recent meltdown
I am absolutely BEGGING all of you to not get your political theory exclusively through internet celebrities.
For real. Every news source has an agenda of some type. I suggest foreign news coverage of your countries affairs. Can be a bit more even handed if they don’t have a much skin in the game
Some days I view the Internet as one of the most important technological advances ever made in the history of mankind.
Other days the worst fucking mistake we coulda made next to Furby's.
Fuck.
Between mentioning Russell Brand, Joe Rogan, and Rumble shit feels like bait.
I thought it was ironic? I mean why would anyone listen to a bunch of unqualified podcasters while counting actual news as propoganda lmao
This posting by op is ironic based on their replies, but unfortunately it was probably created unironically, there are a lot of people who actually think like this
Bingo. Probably should've made that more clear.
because people form parasocial connections with podcasters and come to believe that because they "don't like either side", "aren't established news", or are "more real" that they aren't spreading propoganda, even though they're literally opinion shows
I think that's a bit of a stretch. Its entertainment and that's why I watch it. But even my favorite podcasters are very clearly coming from an angle with their opinions. This isn't a secret.
Like, I enjoy watching Hasan. But the first show I watched of his was literally called "AgitProp" lol.
oh no I'm not saying everyone who watches podcasters/streamers thinks this, I'm saying the specific type of person who would make this would think this. Especially from fans of stuff like the bad faith pod I'll hear them say that they like the show because it "doesn't have an agenda" when it obviously does. Similar type of stuff that you hear from breaking points or timcast fans
Oooohh understood. Yeah that makes sense. I thought you were making a sweeping generalization and I got confused. All good.
This infogrpahic feels like propaganda that's in support of the "least propaganda-ish" sources.
I'm surprised Fox isn't at the very bottom of the bottom, since they can't even legally consider themselves "news".
Maybe CNN is just better at it, making propaganda news without obviously lying all the time ... ? Haven't watched either, though (different continent here).
wait why is Tim Pool an anarcho bidenist, who the fuck made this
oh no it just gets dumber the more I look at it
what does it mean when i have no idea who any of these are?
That you aren't terminally online. Congrats!
Who the hell finds Sam Seder toxic?
Steven Crowder does i guess lmao
Vaush bad! Vaush bad!
Unironically.
What's "lost the plot" supposed to mean here?
"Msnbc-lite" obviously
Full disclosure, I have no idea what this is trying to say and it looks like the ramblings of an insane person. But I think some of the conclusions are funny.
Oh thank God, I thought you made this.
I like cnbc's obsession of trains and public transport tho
hasan piker does not belong over there with vaush 😭
Realistically, they are fairly similar. The real crime is saying Hasan is more toxic than Vaush.
Where is NPR? I think there a few more neutralist news sources you may want to look for. I’m with the other guy, internet news only is going to have its own set of biases.
To be clear, this is not my chart. I strongly disagree with like... 95% of it. But news and politics is interesting to me, especially the agendas of the people speaking. So this is really funny to me.
And its not just internet news that has a bias - everything will. Thats fine though, just try to understand the bias.
I don't even wanna know what the person who created this thinks about Ana Kasparian's recent meltdown
Vaush rad!