Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

As a pack, it would be good to learn to distinguish when a chunk of red meat may be poisoned.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Phoebe Loosinhouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-05-08 06:59 PM
Original message
As a pack, it would be good to learn to distinguish when a chunk of red meat may be poisoned.
I'm speaking of the rumor mill of course. Some rumors are made up whole hog, some have a tiny kernel of truth, some have no resemblance to anything even close to reality. They look good, glistening, tasty, yummo. But they will feed the very worse part of you. You will be drawn into specious speculation of the most horrific kind. It will even be kind of fun. A feeding frenzy will ensue. Then inevitably, it will be debunked and you will look very very foolish and your action in spreading and facilitating garbage will reflect a lot more on you than the person you hoped the garbage would smear.

Thankfully, Obama and the adults in the campaign already know this and that is why they put barbed wire around certain topics and discussions until they are 100% certain with multiple unimpeachable sources that the story is true and "worthy" of comment.

I always thought this board had the smartest, best,posters in the world on it, yet some people fall into traps so easily. Someone posts something like "I heard so and so's husband is well known as a _____________" , no attribution, no source, no nothing except a very ugly allegation and then the swarm starts.

Be my guest if you enjoy this feeding of your basest self. But, it might be worth asking:

Who is saying this -(Do I know them? Are they generally reliable? Is their track record good with stuff like this?)
Why are they saying this?
Are other credible people saying this or is this the first and only you've heard of it
What is the source? (Is the website or purported originator credible or even real)
What is secondary back-up for the source?
Does the story seem outrageous and implausible at first impression? Do other facts or circumstances deny or support the contention?

We have great internet sleuths right on this board who have insight,investigatory and reasoning skills, who have unearthed and forced items into the MSM (some of the best election fraud research in the entire world is right here on DU). I hate to see their legacy undercut when we just go for the cheap thrill.

I am not trying to censor, edit or control what people write. I am only commenting on wasted energy and spent credibility.I know how to hide threads, and I do and I usually just don't respond to threads that I think are really over the top. I have always looked at this place as my first, best place to get THE REAL SCOOP, not the fake scoop or the wouldn't-it-be-great-if-this-were-true scoop.

My 2 cents - take or leave it as you choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC