When the truth/facts slaps them in the face over and over, they just declare it a lie, and act arrogantly.
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
217 points (99.1% liked)
Fediverse vs Disinformation
1192 readers
230 users here now
Pointing out, debunking, and spreading awareness about state- and company-sponsored astroturfing on Lemmy and elsewhere. This includes social media manipulation, propaganda, and disinformation campaigns, among others.
Propaganda and disinformation are a big problem on the internet, and the Fediverse is no exception.
What's the difference between misinformation and disinformation? The inadvertent spread of false information is misinformation. Disinformation is the intentional spread of falsehoods.
By equipping yourself with knowledge of current disinformation campaigns by state actors, corporations and their cheerleaders, you will be better able to identify, report and (hopefully) remove content matching known disinformation campaigns.
Community rules
Same as instance rules, plus:
- No disinformation
- Posts must be relevant to the topic of astroturfing, propaganda and/or disinformation
Related websites
- EU vs Disinfo
- FactCheck.org
- PolitiFact
- Snopes
- Media Bias / Fact Check
- PEN America
- Media Matters
- FAIR
Matrix chat links
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
The model for this stuff is Vladimir Solovyov’s show.
Every "mistake" is a push to see what they can get away with.
99 trial balloons
in a just world, every person on that panel who dismissed her concerns would have a black bag pulled over their head and they'd wake up in a prison in El Salvador.
Concentration camps are bad. These people should be tried and shot.
No. In a just world, that prison wouldn't exist.
Human rights abuses aren't justice no matter who they're committed against.
the fascists should stand trial at the hague as is tradition
Yes because I remember how the allies defeated the Nazis...with kind words.
Some times those that hurt others only understand the rule of the jungle.
I remember how the allies defeated the Nazis...with kind words.
It wasn't by throwing them in concentration camps either
Because people wanting to fight fascist have???? Suggested that? I'm a bit confused with your comment here.
From the beginning of this chain, the comment I believe you were defending
in a just world, every person on that panel who dismissed her concerns would have a black bag pulled over their head and they'd wake up in a prison in El Salvador.
I feel like "well they did it first!" Is a weak and childish justification for acting exactly like ones' enemies.
Yea not what I'm defending, but the reality is that hoping you can talk your way out of fascism is a joke.
You responded to somebody saying "in a just world, that prison wouldn't exist" with "sometimes those that hurt others only understand the rule of the jungle", and I'm confused as to how you didn't intend that to be in advocacy of unjust prisons?
Because we don't live in a just world...the fuck. Have you been paying attention? You lot are sitting around wanting to sing camp fire songs with fascist hoping they'll grow a heart.
TIL, wanting to not have torture prisons is sitting around singing songs.
I think their point is pretty clear - “He who does battle with monsters needs to watch out lest he in the process become a monster himself.”
Yes because I remember how the allies defeated the Nazis...with kind words.
Holy false dichotomy, Batman! Starting out with a fallacy that bad, I'm hesitant to read on..
Some times those that hurt others only understand the rule of the jungle.
😮💨 Should have followed my instincts and spared myself the rallying cry of every violent vigilante and vaguely bigoted Crusader 🙄
No person or society is ever improved by answering atrocities with atrocities.
Lol you keep thinking that while people are being killed.
Justice isn't necessarily a utopian ideal. Justice only cares about fairness/equality, not what is humane.
Justice only cares about fairness/equality, not what is humane.
Not true. Inhumane treatment is by definition never fair and thus never just.
That you consider that a "utopian ideal" rather than the minimum requirement for civilized humans says a lot about you and whatever society has warped your worldview.
I think it says more about your reading comprehension than anything.
Justice not necessarily being a utopian ideal means "Justice" isn't necessary for a utopia. "The maintenance or administration of what is just, especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments"(Merriam-Webster) isn't necessary in a utopia. In fact, it's counterintuitive. "Justice" doesn't care if you stole for fun or [perceived] necessity. "Justice" doesn't care if you killed someone for self-defense, anger, or a casual disregard for human life.
Justice and what you're envisioning are as different from each other as "social equality" is from "social equity".
But it was cool of you to take time to climb atop your high horse before misunderstanding.
Great idea! Whose car should we take?