1
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

My Previous Post (Read it first, as this post might not make sense to you, without reading the previous post first)

I saw a lot of people defending Ars Technica in my previous post. Here is a simple proof that they are an evil company:

ProPublica Posts:

Ars Technica post:

As it can be seen here, the original source of the info/Investigation was Propublica and even in terms of the story cover photo, Propublica used a custom cover.

Yet, despite all of that, as expected Reddit manipulated upvotes to boost the Ars Technica story and even deleted the second ProPublica story from Reddit.

Journalism will be fucked up, because of Condé Nast and their parent company manipulation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Lol, "Post removed by mods"... Pretty damn transparent aren't they?

Not that anyone should be surprised. Never think for one minute that any story is wholly the truth - there's always some element someone is trying to hide, by getting us to focus on something else.

(This isn't a criticism of you, OP, just a general observation about how power brokers have been using the "news" to manipulate perception since Hurst in the 1800's when he used his paper to influence opinion about a labor strike or something, I forget exactly what.)

An interesting article on the history of this issue.

Historian Chilton wrote "the progressive movement during this time promoted the idea that the media’s purpose was to shape the beliefs of voters, since the public was too irrational to make the right choice based singularly on fact."

“The presentation of facts simply as facts, editors and writers reasoned, cannot accomplish the exalted goal of saving civilization,” Chilton wrote. “To do that, facts needed to be presented according to those rhetorical patterns of thought we call opinions, patterns pointed in some particular direction of convincing an imagined jury.”

In other words, progressives at the time believed the public was too stupid to make the right choice, so they had to tell them which choice to make, even lying if needed.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

[-] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Not sure who this "Hurst" guy is.

Like, seriously, if you're going to cite someone, at least spell their name correctly.

this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
1 points (51.7% liked)

Technology

39213 readers
509 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS