- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
It was played up for the show but I think many of us have a Peggy in our life.
I feel like Peggy was played down compared to the ones I know irl. If Peggy was realistic, she wouldn’t be likable.
So much hate for her. How can the Internet hate a woman who made Hank Hill so happy? Shouldn’t she get at least some points for that?
Whenever l have run into snooty Quebequois that insist that I speak French, I channel Peggy and say “Jay parlay fran-says tray bee-en. Jay-tude on lay-cole quart ons.”
That does the trick and they will beg me to speak English.
Pretty sure she’s supposed to be in like her thirties, maybe forty-ish.
I have an aunt that one of my brothers described as
“She is like Peggy Hill but doesn’t make me laugh”
Me langua de la espenil
Students: confused staring
We just call them Karens these days
Karens are different imo. Peggy would never call the cops on a black person, or present some distorted/dishonest version of events to a store manager/911. Shes just a narcissist. I could see an B plot of her getting pulled into a Karen’s orbit though.
Kahn I could definitely see doing some straight up Karen shit.
"Hey Cotton, meet Kahn, he’s Japanese.
NO HE AIN’T! He’s Laotian, ain’t you Mr. Kahn."
Possibly the best interaction with Kahn in the show. Definitely Cotton’s best lines.
My aunt.
Yep
i worked on a pc used by an older, very “conservative” woman awhile back. needed help with her facebook accounts (plural), among other things. she had vpn clients, multiple browsers. tor, the whole bit on there.
it would be one thing if she was just passing tracts, but she was all-in on the fake news, trump, anti-vax, the border, jan 6 and ‘the steal’… basically the whole far-right agenda. and she was spreading that manure far and wide.
the kicker: she’s an employee of a local catholic parish.
the kicker: she’s an employee of a local catholic parish.
Not surprising at all, without misleading and lying to people no religion would gain mass traction
So, it’s clear that a small subpopulation is preferentially tweeting links to sources of misinformation, and for many users, they’re the most significant source of exposure to these sites. So who are these people?
They’re a bit more likely to be female. While both the comparison groups were roughly evenly split between male and female, the superspreaders were 60 percent female. They’re also older, on average 58 years old, nearly 20 years older than the sample as a whole. And, while much of the misinformation about the election largely circulated within Republican circles, only 64 percent of the superspreaders were registered Republicans (nearly 20 percent were registered as Democrats).
This is hardly new phenomenon. Before Twitter and Facebook, it was email chains. I still have some from my mom claiming Obama was the Antichrist.
That specific email was when I knew my mom was irrevocably radicalized.
She wasn’t, and still isn’t, religious. But she was fucking convinced that Obama was literally the antichrist.
The right in general follows the Wrestlemania principle, wherein they exist in a strange quantum state of both believing the narratives and storylines with all their heart, while at the same time understanding enough about the world around them that they can function and understand complex concepts. IE: the vaxxine-skeptical nurses and climate-change denying scientists.
If you’re old enough to remember having to argue with your friends that wrestling is scripted, and your friend doubles down that there really are necromancers and supernatural powers in professional wrestling events, but you also know that point where trying to convince them becomes less enjoyable because you see for a moment that their connection to this fantasy storyline is all they have and you just let them believe that the fantasy and spectacle is real.
Because for wrestling fans and Trump fans, it’s not about logic and reason, it’s about emotion and validation for those emotions, and that validation doesn’t necessarily need to make sense to provide comfort for fear and anxiety and sadness.
Those people never grew up and grew out of their magical thinking. We all have magical thinking about something, but this segment of the population stands out more because their belief is being steered by powerful criminal minds and shaping international policy.
Before that it was fliers and classifieds in the paper for groups to meet up and discuss or have mailing chains.
Although, I would have to admit that back when people who wanted to gather around a single idea had to make an effort and have leadership and infrastructure, you saw a LOT less bullshit nonsense in the world, people just kept their shit to themselves most of the time and it was a little better.
Religion
Someone compare these stats with lead paint exposure stats. I’m so curious if we can finally get positive correlation.
More honestly, it’s easier to accept that people we love are brain damaged, than just plain gullible.
I’m going to guess a big part of the reason that older women spread misinformation more than older men do is that women are more chronically online at that age as opposed to trying to be active and out of the house, and/or less likely to be employed and therefore have a lot of time on their hands with no kids to take care of now that they’re all grown up.
I think you’re right - women are also socialized to seek out social/interpersonal connections more than men; this is a big factor in why the suicide rate for elderly men tends to be significantly higher than for elderly women.
This doesn’t explain the 60 year olds but with the elderly (70+) women in my life, the vulnerability to misinformation is also an artifact of their comparatively poor levels of education. They were schooled with the expectation that they would be SAHMs.
FWD: FWD: RE: RE: RE: FWD: RE: RE:
So the demo that likes to spread malicious gossip (and lies) in real life also does so online? I’m shocked…
I was actually shocked when I found the quiet lady in accounting was actually a huge Twitter user who spewed such wild shit, at the level of JK Rowling toxicity.
Well you know what they say. A superspreader in the streets and a demon in the spreadsheets.
That well known phrase.
I think many of us can remember when their grandparents got their first email account.
FWD:FWD: don’t fall for this kidney harvesting scam!
For the younger generation, it’s Facebook messages.
Oh look my uncle is a racist.
deleted by creator
Ole chatty Cathy.
Wrong c-word
Country Cathy?
No, it’s corny! She’s always cracking puns and one liners, that Cathy.
I really hope that was a deliberate pun about cracking corn. I’m going to go ahead and believe it.
FUCK
IT WASN’T.
I didn’t realize the cracked corn potential of my joke!
Shhhh, just recognize yourself for the comedic genius that you are.
Send 'em this:
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/shorts/MJ3e9EIr3f8
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Onion News Network called it
Women☕
Simply yet more proof of Twitter being a terrible platform.
Social media, not just Twitter. The key issue here is human nature. These platforms are just the force multiplier. Misinformation is alive and well on Lemmy as well. It just flies under the radar for the most part because it doesn’t go against your prior beliefs.
Examples of misinformation on Lemmy?
I’m curious if there’s any software way to reduce it here. Lemmy admins aren’t enslaved by profit like most social networks.
I don’t think there’s a silver bullet for it. What works is critical thinking and humility about what you don’t know. One good rule of thumb is to keep in mind that things are virtually always nuanced and complicated. When ever someone presents something as simple, straight forward, black and white etc. an alarm should go off. Even when what is being said might not technically be incorrent it’s still often just one side of the story. There’s always the other side to it as well. Nothing/no one is all bad or all good. If one stands for a cause but can’t make a single good faith argument against their own view about it then they’re not thinking honestly about it.
Sure, but I’d love a software way to reduce it even if there’s no silver bullet. All the critical thinking in the world won’t make me immune to propaganda, and realistically the average person isn’t going to change any time soon.
If there’s always another side, then there’s another side to your “there’s always another side” argument, so perhaps there are some one-sided topics like “does something exist”.
Yeah that’s another rule-of-thumb: Never say never or always, there’s always an exception. I’m also fully aware of the irony of that whole sentence.
Yeah I get what you mean. Would be nice to have but I don’t know how such an add-on would work in practice. I imagine that rather than filtering it out it would instead need to be something that adds a correction/context next to it. There’s usually atleast a kernel of truth even in misinformation so simply just hiding it doesn’t seem optional either. An interesting point about free-speech I heard recently was that by silencing the fringes it leaves the rest of us ignorant to what views people hold as well as prevents us from hearing all the evidence that they’re wrong. Generally I’m not against misinformation on places like Lemmy but what I do wish is that the top comment on each thread was the one providing nuance, context and correction. This place just doesn’t encourage that. There’s a set of accepted beliefs and viewpoints and anything going against that is just met with hostility. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful psychological phenomenom and people don’t like their beliefs challenged.
Maybe an LLM fed with the political science equivalent of IPCC reports. Just need to get those consensual reports written!
Didnt need a study to tell you this. They may as well be bots for all the critical thinking they got
Its all yo momma’s fault!
Yo grammy’s fault
That depends on my age’s fault
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Hiding misandry behind a bear/man comparison - cool use of statistics!
Hiding misogyny behind stats showing older women using fake news - WOW THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE!
Removed by mod
I like how we are blaming women for everything again. Feels real old school.
Easier to scream sexism than to think.
I agree. They’ve been a scourge on society for far too long.
I agree.
Well, obviously, because that’s what youre doing.
