Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
Found the internet!
58.0k
Posted by3 months ago
Helpful (Pro)GoldRocket LikeHelpful9Wholesome7Silver3All-Seeing Upvote2

The argument that climate change is not man made has been incontrovertibly disproven by science, yet many Americans believe that the global crisis is either not real, not of our making, or both, in part because the news media has given deniers a platform in the name of balanced reporting

3.3k comments
79% Upvoted
level 1
ModModerator Achievement · 3 mo. ago · Stickied comment

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Vote

4 more replies

level 1
Comment deleted by user · 3 mo. ago
level 2

It does! I've been doing a lot of reading on this kind of phenomenon. We're still affected by propaganda from thousands of years ago.

1.6k
level 2

Propaganda tells a story and humans are driven and attracted to stories that fit an emotional narrative. People who tell the truth tend to stick to dry isolated facts. You can only combat false stories with true stories (that are factually based).

136
level 2

lingers or works?

12
level 2

I disagree. The problem with propaganda is that it completely reforms a person's mind. One thing we human beings don't generally talk about is how misinformation/manipulation can change how we see things in other areas as well. Kind of like someone telling a kid 2+2=5. It has a knock on effect that screws up their understanding of the rest of math. Or would hypothetically. Leaving the kid deeply confused and exposed to massive amounts of insecurity because of what they don't know.


It doesn't just linger. It reforms how we think about things. Because if climate change ain't so bad then maybe covid-19 isn't either. And maybe all that stuff people talk about the rich screwing people over isn't true either. And maybe those people of color really are just complaining. And women do sometimes act in a certain way. So on and so forth. Illogical thinking breeds more illogical thinking. But first. There needs to be something missing or loose for a person to be given/accept a massively illogical thought to begin with.


Climate change not being real isn't and never has been the first domino to fall.

34
level 2

Anyone can make something up, especially if it feeds what people already want to think. Refuting the BS with good science takes time and effort. I feel like it's always going to be a losing battle.

4
level 2

A low effort lie that appeals to what people already think fear or want, will be more effective than a truth that takes understanding,l more time and, and asymmetrically higher effort to try to undo the lie.

3
level 2

It does like the capitalist propaganda to not pay fair wages that "nobody wants to work anymore" is been going on for over 120 years.

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/w4kv2c/guess_jobs_always_had_a_hard_time_finding/

3
level 2

It is easier to fool a man than to convince him he has been fooled.

3
level 2

The problem with “both side-erism” is that it’s bad optics for a member of the CNN Board to call the newsroom and tell the editors to lie about climate change. But it’s totally innocent to make them “tell both sides of the story.”

3
level 2

Oh yes it does...the original drug war propaganda by Nixon admin still messes with people's compassion for an arbitrary subgroup of people:

You're doing the most deadly (by number) drugs by the name of alcohol and nicotine? Prost, let's drink on it.

You're doing mescaline or LSD? To the psych ward! Stimulants? To the jail asap. Opioids? Rot on the streets, dying through extreme variation in potency that our Prohibition caused.

It's actually extremely sad as soon as you open your mind about how arbitrary this distinction is, and what extreme fallout followed (massive jail population of nonviolent people who just wanted to chill out a bit). One of the big tragedies of the late 20th and the 21st century imho!

3
level 2

It’s not the only problem, but it is certainly one of them.

2
level 2

Stupid will prevail. Life will always find a way.

2
level 2
level 2

And it’s very effective on idiots!

2
level 2

Agreed. And another problem is that we can't fix stupid.

2
level 2

Well, at least we found out WHY the human race is doomed.

2
level 2

Just like those greenhouse gases

2
level 2

We are still suffering from the fallout of both the satanic panick and red scare.

2
level 2

OP is wrong. It’s not due to balanced reporting. It’s due to media being owned by entrenched financial interests with petroleum stocks. Remember how smoking wasn’t bad for you? Same thing.

2
level 2

Especially when funded by the fossil fuel industry.

2

96 more replies

level 1
Comment removed by moderator · 3 mo. ago
level 2
Comment removed by moderator · 3 mo. ago
level 2
Comment removed by moderator · 3 mo. ago
level 2
Comment removed by moderator · 3 mo. ago
level 2

It's like the movie "Don't look up". People just want to go on living their mundane lives and the people in charge want people to keep living their mundane lives so they can keep making a quick buck off of them.

No one is going to care until we start to lose out coastlines.

2

24 more replies

level 1

“Balanced reporting” doesn’t mean both sides of an argument deserve equal merit. One side can indeed be factually correct while the other is just plain wrong. We’re talking about facts, not opinions.

1.3k
level 2
· 3 mo. ago · edited 3 mo. ago

Even if it did mean that, it still wouldn't be balanced. It's not balanced if you give a take that is in the vast minority an equal amount of voice. If they only represent a small percentage of the science community, balanced would be giving them that small percentage of a platform to share it, not 50/50.

255
level 2
· 3 mo. ago · edited 3 mo. ago

It's like the school board member administrator that suggested that teachers need to teach "both sides" of the Holocaust. Sometimes there's not another side. Hell, a lot of times things are just facts and that's all.

It's been a depressing couple decades.

Edit: wrong authority figure.

11
level 2

I hate balanced reporting cause it's always "Let's hear from this brilliant scientist who has several peer reviewed studies, has been nominated for a nobel prize and has been in the field for over 30 years. Now let's hear from this 40 year old named Kevin, who peaked in highschool but failed upwards cause his dad has a car dealership and he's now spending his time on facebook looking at pictures of underaged girls". Then pretend like both of them have a valid point.

81
level 2

Equally there aren't two sides to every issue. Sometimes there's just one. Sometimes there's five sides.

52
level 2

Left, Right, and Center is the worst program on NPR. They give airtime to “sides” regardless of the debate, as if debating whether the earth is flat or not warrants something like this. It’s purely for ratings and it sucks.

52
level 2

Not only that, but when you talk about a topic like climate change, "presenting both sides" makes it seem as though both sides have equal backing, when in fact it's more like 98% of professionals agree, and 2% of a fringe element disagree.

That's not something accurately portrayed "presenting both sides."

3
level 2

I don't beleive its an info issue. Fundamentally it's a team issue. People are more willing to follow their "team" instead of trying to figure out the facts. Rights are particularly bad about this often shooting themselves in the foot to own the left. Not saying the left doesn't do it, just It's a major problem for the right. The team mentality does have it's benefits. The right is just as diverse in ideas as the left but little in fighting happens and for the most part the groups work together. Since all topics in the USA are only seen through the lens of two parties, the ones who play teams just look through 1 lens.

2
level 2

In a truly balanced news panel you would have 99 scientists telling the truth about global warming, against one kook who argues against the fact. It's despicable that the reality is with one of "both" sides having a "neutral" argument.

2