this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
918 points (93.5% liked)
Technology
59346 readers
6983 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Jesus Christ that NYT article has so many weasel words in it. "Seen as", "appear to be," blah blah blah. I hate the NYT.
I mean, they probably don't want to get sued by the world's richest man-baby for libel for declaring it outright.
Even if it's true, they'll have to go through the court case. It'd be pretty hilarious IMO, though. He'd have to prove he's not a Nazi-sympathising piece of shit, which is impossible.
Yeah. In context it's absolutely clear
What does rest of the tweet say and why is it left out?
I don't have the original but I remember it pivots to anti-Muslim-immigration propaganda. Pretty sure it even referred to them as "hordes" because, of course, poor refugees trying to find a better life are analogous to an invading Mongol army in neo-Nazi propaganda.
More of the antisemitic conspiracy theory. You can find it easily enough, and amplification isn't a good idea
The tweet seems to have been deleted and none of the articles quote the full tweet. Full context is kind of important considering that's what the news is about, isn't it?
One of the things hate groups count on is that tendency to provide full context as a means of spreading their message. It's actually quite important not to do it for them.
If somebody was to respond to your comment with "You have said the actual truth" would you not characterize that like an endorsement?
We can't possibly have looked at the same thing. What are you talking about?
Has there ever been a NYT that wasn't full of weasel worda