What If Facebook Is the Real ‘Silent Majority’? | Hacker News Reader

What If Facebook Is the Real ‘Silent Majority’?

nytimes.com

32 pointslongdefeat15 comments

Lockdown is making people way more extreme, as they spend more time in online echo chambers and talking to people they already know. Talking to people you don't know, in real life, who have differing positions, who live around you... easier to find common ground.

crazy idea maybe people that are more online are slightly more antisocial and are louder with their opinions/have less of a filter

As we all know, Eternal September made Usenet a utopian paradise of ideas and interaction... /s

Poor Billy Joe

From August.

I'm wondering if someone reposted because of how close the election is.

'To be sure, Facebook is not the only medium where right-wing content thrives. Millions of Americans still get their news from cable news and talk radio, where conservative voices have dominated for years. Many pro-Trump Facebook influencers also have sizable presences on Twitter, YouTube and other social networks'.

The NYT were being disingenuous back in August here - Tucker Carlson dominates cable TV pundit viewing figures while CNN, the NYT and the other Democrat supporting media have made a fortune bashing Trump and whipping up fear and hatred over the last four years.

In a democracy it is profoundly wrong to imply that your opposition has no right to exist, to question their credibility and to constantly make claims of what they think and believe and then insult them for those ideas.

I am a registered Democrat and am appalled by the lack of a DNC political platform beyond 'getting rid of Trump'.

This has become a very toxic, unhealthy situation and the NYT has lost a lot of credibility participating in these behaviors IMO

While I agree that the situation has become toxic, this both-sides-ing is not particularly helpful and can be used to justify literally any extreme position. Trump arguing to not count the remaining ballots is not a reasonable counterpoint to the left’s expectations of...conducting an election according to precedent and rules.

> The NYT were being disingenuous back in August here

Only if it was just August. When were they not disingenuous?

The idea that the Democrats have no platform beyond getting rid of Trump is ludicrous. The Biden campaign has been articulating specific policy positions for months now, and the Democratic National Convention actually passed a platform, while the RNC refused to do so, instead essentially saying, "We support Trump and whatever he wants to do."

This isn't both-sides-ism. It's straight up projection—the classic technique we've seen from the right for years now to muddy the waters.

The culture that the left created of painting the right as morally evil / repugnant / deplorable has truly backfired. Political Correctness not only created a Streisand effect, but it also created a martyr mentality for right wing ideas.

The sad thing is that the left learned absolutely nothing from 2016 strategy-wise. I remember explaining to my leftist friends at length why people would vote for Trump. They finally understood, I thought. Then 2020 rolls around and it's like they forgot everything we discussed. Back to the deplorable playbook.

> created a martyr mentality for right wing ideas.

This has been around for decades. See: "The War on Christmas", "Taking God Out of Schools" and any number of other conservative (and especially Christian) rallying cries since the 90s.

The bible out of schools thing is from 1963, Abington School District v. Schempp.

Understanding why a person would do a thing does not exempt said thing from being deplorable.

I wouldn’t trust the Grey Lady to accurately report on the so-called Silent Majority any more than I would trust Breitbart to report on the Clintons.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com