633
Accurate representation
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
633 points (98.5% liked)
Political Memes
5579 readers
1965 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
... By 2024
Good to know how far we've come.
Where does it say that in this post?
It's written very, very small in the bottom right, in one of the bald old man's liver spots.
dO yOuR oWn ReSeArCh!1
Proceeds to Google until desirable result is found, then screech in to the void about it
I'll be sure to heed your lesson. But, just to be clear... is it that I should do somebody else's research, or that I should get somebody else to to mine...?
And, one more clarification... Is it that I should hold an opinion but not go on to Google until I find the result supporting it, or that I should not hold an opinion and then not go on to Google to form it, or not hold an opinion and then go on to Google to confirm it... No, wait, that isn't going to work... Perhaps, hold an opinion and then go on to Google to deny it... Sounds wrong.... I know, go on to Google to hold an opinion and then deny it myself... No. Have myself as an opinion and then deny Google... Get Google to give me an opinion and then hold it?
It's ok to read someone else's research. But if you automatically dismiss anything that disagrees with a previously held belief, you aren't researching, you're looking for confirmation. You can find confirmation for just about anything.
It's one thing to be critical and say "maybe the specific scenario presented here doesn't really apply to me." It's quite another to say "this can't be true because I read something before that said the opposite."
Most people "doing their own research" fall in to the latter category.
Did you Google that?
I'm a proud googledebunker.
Anyway, confusion aside,I've decided to take your advice and eschew online research.
I've found some good old-fashioned print resources...
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/subscribe/
https://nypost.com/
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1510779027/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=
I look forward to getting stuck in to some bias-free research and clearing out those pesky old opinions. Thanks.
Fixed that for you. Or did you not even realise you're online right now?
You should listen to your dip shit uncle who says "mainstream media is lying to you, also listen to this flat earth dude"
Proving my point. You're even actually proud of your blind fawning obsequiousness. Its sickening.
No, that's about right. If you have an opinion, you should be challenging it with additional information. The key is not tossing anything anything that doesn't already agree with your opinion. Going in with the understanding that you are looking for information that proves you wrong is a good approach, though.
Surely you mean "one should..."
No, on second thoughts...
“First response is that it is none of your business. Or anyone’s. Second is that I knew him and we met occasionally.”
-also Noam Chomsky, but this time about why he was moving so much money for Epstein
Ohh. A whataboutism and a confirmation-bias Google search.
Does that score double?