Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

cnorw00d t1_j69b16g wrote

Reply to comment by MEMENARDO_DANK_VINCI in [OC] How news stories evolve in the news cycle by PartisanPlayground

I'd get that for a news show like ABC or CBS but fox and CNN are 24 hour news networks. They have the opportunity to introduce new conversations instead of focusing on the same few ( and dumb most of the time) stories and they mostly do it to keep people watching for advertising. They don't even come at it with differing perspectives beyond what is considered the mainstream left and right.

In the age of the internet we should know that people are capable of focusing on multiple things. Tik tok should show you that there are worldwide superstars you may have never even heard of

1

MEMENARDO_DANK_VINCI t1_j69lla9 wrote

The individual is but for the news to have any weight they have to run the same thing more than once and talk about the same thing more than twice

5

ianhillmedia t1_j6cyn6f wrote

We have a saying in broadcast news. When you’re tired of talking about it is usually when the audience is first hearing about it.

2

iiioiia t1_j6a7ub7 wrote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_truth_effect

https://ml4a.github.io/ml4a/how_neural_networks_are_trained/

0

MEMENARDO_DANK_VINCI t1_j6a7za9 wrote

I think you think you made a point, but you did not

2

iiioiia t1_j6a8wx2 wrote

What's interesting is that "made a point" does not have one single implementation, but this tends to be not how it appears to a person performing an implementation.

I mean come on, this is a data science subreddit, not /r/politics.

0

MEMENARDO_DANK_VINCI t1_j6abvab wrote

No, you come on and use your words to describe the point YOU want to make. Arguing by allusion is not arguing in good faith. Any Interpretor would have to parse their thoughts through you not being forthcoming with yours.

0

iiioiia t1_j6acsoo wrote

> No, you come on and use your words to describe the point YOU want to make.

I've made it above, you are welcome to do with it as you please.

> Arguing by allusion is not arguing in good faith.

lol, memes are not effective on me, though I suspect they'll be rather influential on 3rd party observers (which is the point perhaps?).

> Any Interpretor would have to parse their thoughts through you not being forthcoming with yours.

Oh God....how do you know how people you've never met would experience the situation?

Sir: are you putting me on?

0

MEMENARDO_DANK_VINCI t1_j6ad9ck wrote

What? How do I know that the human psyche changes when met with unknowns vs knowns?

Making a point to yourself is what you did, troll me is also what you did. I didn’t state a meme I informed you that your method of argument is lackluster in a polite discussion, though I didn’t use so many words.

It’s okay if you can’t articulate your point well just try your best! And I’ll help you refine what you actually wanted to say :)

2

iiioiia t1_j6aedge wrote

> What? How do I know that the human psyche changes when met with unknowns vs knowns?

You very well may not know it....it's not exactly common knowledge!

> Making a point to yourself is what you did, troll me is also what you did.

Here you are describing your experience. The experiences of others (more commonly known as "reality", or what "is") are not necessarily the same.

> I didn’t state a meme I informed you that your method of argument is lackluster in a polite discussion, though I didn’t use so many words.

"Not arguing in good faith" is a meme.

meme:

  • an image, video, piece of text, etc., typically humorous in nature, that is copied and spread rapidly by internet users, often with slight variations.

  • an element of a culture or system of behavior passed from one individual to another by imitation or other nongenetic means.

> It’s okay if you can’t articulate your point well just try your best! And I’ll help you refine what you actually wanted to say :)

Haha, I love it!! 🙏 You just earned yourself an updoot, partner!

1