This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Huh? You're talking about having to expose their voices? I don't think that really constitutes "expose their identity".
I think part of the point is, people will have to come out and identify as election deniers. The next thing, they're being accused of supporting the Jan 6th coup, wanting to overthrow the legitimate government, and being a fully-signed up fascist.
This podcast is probably okay if nobody except the likes of mottizens are going to listen to it, but it's a real possibility that someone might listen to it and decide to out the fascists getting ready to support Trump in his second attempt to impose totalitarian dictatorship. Look at all the alarm and disquiet over Project 2025 from sober reliable sources.
(Yes, that last was tongue-in-cheek). Everyone from "women and minorities most affected" to "climate change denialism" to "concentration camps for gays and forced pregnancy!" just in that random sampling.
There's plenty of election deniers who openly admit to it and would probably have no problem with it even in conversations with strangers. What has happened to them that is bad?
Fox news was sued and lost almost $800 million.
Am I misremembering, or was this the one in which Fox was shown to have peddled the idea that Dominion's voting machines were rigged but not even the hosts saying it believed what they were saying?
That's not what the lawsuit alleged. It said that hosts were allowed to make claims that executives believed were false, and that guests were brought on and made claims that the hosts believed were false. I don't think there were any claims that were (provably) disbelieved by the person who made them. The argument was that executives/hosts had enough control over the claims of hosts/guests that allowing those claims to be made was tantamount to making them directly.
But in this case that means the podcast itself would be analogous to Fox executives/hosts, and the motte members would be the hosts/guests, so it's not a direct example.
Okay, yeah, this is the case I was thinking of. I recall going through the evidence brought against them and I found it fairly convincing that Fox had no reason to believe what they were peddling and also didn't believe it themselves.
The actual proof can be found in the pdf at the bottom of this article. It's 192 pages, but it's either screenshots that can quickly be read or large font question-answer segments. I think it clearly indicates that the people at Fox didn't believe what they were saying, because their own research team was telling them there wasn't any evidence, and it notes that Fox believed executives had an obligation to correct people from stating falsehoods on their own network.
Ultimately, what did Fox in wasn't the view that the election was stolen. It was not believing their own public statements.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Well but keep in mind the Boston Strangler got away with it for for decades before we discovered how to use DNA to identify people. Voice identification isn't far off I'd bet, but it isn't really necessary - this isn't a court case, fancy computer programs aren't required to whip up an outrage mob to ruin your life, only plausibility is, and like Pierre said a motivated individual could do that today. So yeah they are exposing their identity in my perspective, in a way they hadn't before, but even if you think it's only a possibility why would someone roll the dice on their livelihood for a podcast argument?
You could just speak through a speech synthesizer.
More options
Context Copy link
I've previously spent $130 to hire a Nigerian voice actress to redub someone concerned about their identity and I imagine the masking options are way cheaper now.
Redubbing is a great idea, and it would mollify my concerns about my identity enough to sweeten the pot. Although yeah, I'd hope it was cheaper than $130.
Adjusting equalizer settings is usually enough, and I haven't explored the AI voice tools yet but I imagine there's potential there
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There's also a possibility that some of the snow which hits my tongue was irradiated and I end up slowly consuming enough radioactive material to kill me. We don't take risk by itself as our sole factor. At the end of the day, I think the chances of someone maliciously using a voice recording from someone here is low enough that going on the podcast isn't an issue.
This case from a few months ago is interesting.
More options
Context Copy link
I think that your relatively safe opinions have stopped you from fully thinking this through. It certainly does seem unlikely at this moment that someone would use a voice recording from here against a user. But it also seemed completely ridiculous that people would lose their jobs for opinions they held 20 years ago, or go after members of your family, until it happened and now it happens all the time. The concern isn't simply this moment, it is the rest of time.
All of those people made it much less work to find their identity than is under discussion.
20 years ago there was an expectation of privacy which doesn't exist today. There weren't programs that could search images and match faces. The culture frowned on the idea of firing someone for non work related issues, so even if someone did suspect their black face halloween costume might resurface, they probably thought they could just apologise for it like in a sane world.
Besides which, we are talking about people who are convinced that the most powerful government in the world has become an anarchotyranny that hates them and does everything in its power to gaslight the planet about its democracy. And they're right.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not convinced that anyone who goes onto the podcast is in serious danger of losing their jobs or having their families harassed in two decades time or even further into the future. Even if they happen to be election truthers.
Yeah I gathered. How about you get ymeskhout to say your full name, address and telephone number on the next episode. Boy would my face be red then!
Man, it's a good thing Yassine isn't asking for those in the first place, huh?
Are you not allowed to do things of your own volition? Or do I maybe have a point?
We're talking about what has to be necessarily revealed on Yassine's podcast. Voice is necessary simply because people have to speak on a podcast, the information you're talking about wouldn't be necessary unless Yassine was insisting on identifying people to that level.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Voice + whatever history one can build up from this website + potential reddit history and in the present of AI that's more than enough for a motivated journalist to round up a list of wrong-thinkers to push whatever psyop-of-the-month or even just to keep on file in case whatever organization they associate with started making statements about Gaza or whatever in the next year. If I can allow myself to be slightly paranoid.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link