7 ms·
It's not propaganda, it's a reasonable observation about the NSA's duties, and it's not meant to tell the whole story. The conspiracy types need to tone down a
by walod 12y ago
It's not propaganda, it's a reasonable observation about the NSA's duties, and it's not meant to tell the whole story. The conspiracy types need to tone down a bit so that a thought-out and nuanced discussion can take place. You're just ranting and throwing Alex Jones and Greenwald buzzwords around, disabling any real insight.
- FeeTinesAMady 12y agoBut the pro-government shills ARE here. That's not paranoia, that's fact, unless you think they'd target Reddit only for some reason, which makes no sense. So why can't we talk about them? If we don't face up to the reality of this kind of propaganda, we won't be able to have proper discussions about important topics like this one. As the other responder to me pointed out, this account had ONE post to its name almost a year ago before the post I responded to today. I don't think they got their money's worth out of this one due to how easy it was to spot, but all the other ones upvoting it are earning their pay.
- krapp 12y agoFine. The shills are here, and you're free to accuse people you don't agree with of being puppets of the government, as you have. What does doing so actually accomplish, besides spreading FUD?
- FeeTinesAMady 12y agoYou think I am accusing him of being a shill because I don't agree with him? Have you seen his posting history? That's pretty much the definition of a shill who isn't trying very hard. Much more dangerous are the ones who actually make normal posts on stories throughout the year and only turn on the propaganda when the discussion turns to the NSA and government activities. Those ones you can't detect. I don't understand why you're more upset with me for pointing out propaganda than the propaganda machine itself.
- krapp 12y agoBecause your evidence that yeahyeah is a shill is circumstantial at best, and sowing doubt by invoking an intangible enemy within whose only observable property is disagreement with some orthodoxy is itself blatant propagandism. And even a cursory glance throughout this thread would reveal that it isn't exactly brimming over with warm and fuzzy feelings about the US, so I don't know what it is you're worried about. This pervasive shilling you claim is happening here doesn't seem to be working. You may be right. You may very well be right. But you're not accomplishing anything except signaling to people that if they think too hard about certain points of view, then they're just being stooges. You can argue against it without stooping to the same tactics you're accusing others of.
- FeeTinesAMady 12y agoWhat kind of evidence do you expect to find? I'm not attacking someone just because of his opinion, nor am I advocating that. I'm calling out a shill. Look at the facts. One post before today. A pro-NSA post that reads like rhetoric. This post is voted up to the very top comment of the discussion, DESPITE the lack of "warm and fuzzy feelings about the US". Now, in a conversation where the sentiment is so anti-NSA, why do you think this has so many upvotes? That's evidence of rigged voting. That he has failed to sway opinion here does not at all mean that he isn't a shill. That's enough evidence to convict. Look, here's an article where you can start reading about these kind of psyops: http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/02/26/reddit-shills-tried-hide-truth/ http://ultraculture.org/blog/2014/02/26/reddit-shills-tried-... Discussion forums like this one need to be aware of this sort of thing going on. We have to talk about it. We have to try and point out people whose job it is to steer conversations to their liking. It is the right of a free people to associate and freely converse with their peers and make up their own minds free of malicious interference and cointelpro. If government agents actively manipulate public opinion in favor of them, and the public opinion is different from what it otherwise would be, then there is no democracy. That is wrong. What can we do, when there's no proof? We can use our brains and examine the evidence. We can call out obvious shills to try and stem the tide. That is what I am advocating for. We should point out obvious shills so that discussions have more of a chance at reaching their natural conclusions. You seem to be advocating that we do nothing at all, and that is what I disagree with.
- Confusion 12y agoGiven how many people simply are pro-government, do they even need shills?
- antocv 12y ago> thought-out and nuanced discussion can take place Everyone who doesnt agree with me and my statements isnt thought-out and nuanced and modern and polite in discussions.
- XorNot 12y agoAnd what looks like apathy can also just be a sign your argument isn't as compelling as you think it is.