site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   33021 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 17, 2023

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

wow...was not expecting this Live updates: Dominion v. Fox News trial ends with last-minute $787 million settlement

The highly anticipated trial in the defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News began and ended Tuesday with a $787 million settlement between the two parties.

After a lengthy recess, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis dismissed the jury and announced that the issue was "resolved" prior to the opening arguments. Dominion has accused the conservative cable news giant of knowingly, and repeatedly, broadcasting guests’ and hosts’ baseless allegations after the 2020 presidential election that Dominion’s voting machines were rigged to help Joe Biden steal the election from then-President Donald Trump.

News Corp stock, to my surprise, is unchanged. That is a considerable amount of money , but perhaps the outcome was priced into the stock already. Usually the 1st Amendment entails a considerable burden of proof on the plaintiff for defamation cases, but evidently News Corp felt it would lose in a jury trial, hence the settlement. These cases are notoriously hard to win, let alone get a large payday. This also shows the dangers of audience capture. Between this and Jan 6th (as well as Unite the Right protestors, arrests of business associates, consultants, lawyers, and others), it also shows the huge cost (monetarily, reputationally, etc.) of supporting Trump and Trumpism, which has been inflicted on pretty everyone but Trump himself, who is still mostly unscathed.

evidently News Corp felt it would lose in a jury trial, hence the settlement.

Quite possible, but it also strikes me as possible that they think ongoing publicity shined on their handling of the election was worse for the brand than just coughing up some cash and moving on.

Between this and Jan 6th (as well as Unite the Right protestors, arrests of business associates, consultants, lawyers, and others), it also shows the huge cost (monetarily, reputationally, etc.) of supporting Trump and Trumpism, which has been inflicted on pretty everyone but Trump himself, who is still mostly unscathed.

This is particularly striking when we consider the dog that didn't bark when it comes to BLM riots and dishonest news coverage with the opposite valence. At this point, it's pretty hard to not get the message with regard to which way the hammer of "justice" will swing.

This is particularly striking when we consider the dog that didn't bark when it comes to BLM riots and dishonest news coverage with the opposite valence. At this point, it's pretty hard to not get the message with regard to which way the hammer of "justice" will swing.

The issue is not dishonest coverage - nobody can sue due to the media "defaming" them by being too favorable to the cause of BLM or claiming protests were "mostly peaceful"

In a more similar case - i.e. the Covington Kid- iirc the media was sued and did settle.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats