In Germany, social media algorithms are pumping out huge amounts of far-right, pro-AfD content.
-
Wait, you're both saying people voted for Brexit out of their own free will but also that advertising doesn't persuade people? How do you explain Cambridge Analytica literally influencing millions of people to vote for Brexit? (a vote won by 2% margin btw) - like why would the right-wing establishment pay for ads if not to sway public opinion?
Do you really think neoliberals spent millions to inform people why Brexit is good for them actually because that was factual information people couldn't have found otherwise?
I don't know what you think you're proving with that link. Do you think I'm arguing that political advertising isn't real? Because I never argued that. Cambridge Analytica scraped a lot of Facebook data, and it is claimed they used that data to advertise to potential voters. So what? That's how democracy works: convincing potential voters of the righteousness of your cause. Are you arguing that people should no longer be allowed to debate and inform each other in a democracy?
-
I'm not sure if you read your sources but you are only corroborating what I argued. It's a lot of empty talk. None of them are willing to act. Take the example of the border security. It's theatre. Even if an illegal immigrant is stopped, they still have the right to reside in the country for many years, and indefinitely if they refuse to leave in most circumstances. All of this is paid for by German citizens. I can't believe you would use the Greens as an example of a party getting tough on immigration. They have zero policies to reduce immigration.
To summarise your sources: not a single party is willing to act on immigration. Don't be surprised when people vote for parties which will.
I am not wasting any more time by digging out statistics about any of this stuff. Since you apparently on purpose ignore the blatantly obvious part where 2 other major parties actively voted with AfD for exactly what they want on migration I don't think any amount of sources or data could convince you anyway.
-
I am not wasting any more time by digging out statistics about any of this stuff. Since you apparently on purpose ignore the blatantly obvious part where 2 other major parties actively voted with AfD for exactly what they want on migration I don't think any amount of sources or data could convince you anyway.
No, please, continue to support my arguments. I very much appreciate it.
-
Why would someone use boost instead of another option?
General curiosity
Familiarity for one; it was a great Reddit client and it's a good Lemmy one too as well; sensible layout, decent customisation etc.
I paid for ad free ages ago and never looked back.
It hasn't been updated in a while though, so.im playing with Thunder and it's been a pretty nice option as well. Plus, you know, FOSS and available on Droidify/F-Droid.
-
Yes? But what does this have to do with immigration?
I'm not making that link. The user above argued Brexit was caused by appeasement. I was addressing that specific claim.
I generally side against the neoliberals. In this case, they have been tirelessly fighting for globalisation and high immigration. Like all economic policies, it comes with some good and some bad. It has certainly resulted in a lot of top line wealth generation. The problem is that most of it has been accrued at the top. This is not sustainable. I think this is why we are seeing a general backlash to globalisation: the experiment hurt a lot of middle and lower class people.
So you're acknowledging that it's a problem of wealth extraction but your proposed solution is for left wing parties to adopt a more anti-immigration stance instead of resolving the issue of inequality?
Right wing parties platform on isolationist policies (Brexit) while massively boosting globalization (how there's now more migration post-Brexit than pre) and using migrants as a scapegoat for people's economic issues.
Pinning the issue of globalization on migrants is like putting the blame on the exploited for the crimes of the exploiters.
Globalization isn't bad because it allows people to resettle, escape political and environmental instability in their own countries - but because neoliberal interests specifically funnel away wealth from their local lower classes and destabilize poorer foreign nations to provide cheap labour for their businesses at home.
So instead of saying how great Denmark is for adopting "zero asylum" policies why not spend your energy advocating for wealth redistribution on a global scale? I agree, ideally people wouldn't need to migrate to richer counties - but I don't see the same "anti-globalist" parties advocating for paying reparations or providing zero debt aid to poorer nations instead either.
Denmark's approach seems to prioritize protecting their domestic welfare system rather than addressing the global systems that create inequality. They've maintained many of the same neoliberal international policies while building higher walls around their own social safety net - exemplifying a "freedom for me, but not for thee" approach.
-
I don't know what you think you're proving with that link. Do you think I'm arguing that political advertising isn't real? Because I never argued that. Cambridge Analytica scraped a lot of Facebook data, and it is claimed they used that data to advertise to potential voters. So what? That's how democracy works: convincing potential voters of the righteousness of your cause. Are you arguing that people should no longer be allowed to debate and inform each other in a democracy?
You're equating Cambridge Analytica's targeted psychological manipulation based on secretly harvested personal data with ordinary citizens debating each other. Do you really see no difference between billion-dollar campaigns using Al to exploit psychological vulnerabilities and regular people discussing politics? Who exactly is doing the 'convincing' in your version of democracy?
-
I've had some good conversations with local TUSC members collecting signatures and so on, I've a lot of respect for them but sadly the general public don't seem to. I think after the kicking by thatcher, unions and socialism in general are out of fashion. I do think there should be a broadly left party, allowing secondary membership maybe. Work on getting agreement on some issues, laser focus on what's most urgent and get decent people elected. I'd support any party with decent policies and which had the most chance of getting elected.
I dunno, I've lost faith since Corbyn. He was prevented from being elected. I believe the left are kept from power, because in my lifetime, most of the people I talk to are to the left of the people who've been power. Jeremy Corbyn being character assassinated wasn't surprising to me. So I'm not fixated on getting lecturers into Westminster. I don't think it's possible.
-
The AfD won't sweep but they will likely become the 2nd strongest party, after the conservative CDU whose right wing loves the Republicans:
Among others in this image: Former traffic minister Andreas Scheuer, a prominent CDU member (CSU to be more precise but it's basically the same party).
If AfD + CDU achieve a majority it's not unlikely that they will form a coalition - or at the very least vote for the same bills.
Fascism is on a global rise. The fascist Reform UK is surging in British polls, Italy has a fascist government, the fascist ÖVP has gotten the most votes in the recent Austrian election etc etc
Fascism is on a global rise and actively supported by Russia, China and the US. I doubt that democracy can survive efficient Russian disinformation + the full resources of China and the US.
I'd say it will only get worse from here.
Fascism is also supported by many billionaires, because they won't be targeted anyways.
-
Change apps!
Other than the ads, is there a compelling reason to?
-
BAAAAANNNN THEEEEEEMMMM
Jesus fucking christ if I could go back in time and destroy the internet I would.
Yes ban tiktok and X... And meta too... All social media is infected! They're all impure!!! The state must attack! smh \s
-
Almost like some American tech giants are aiding Russia or something.
Almost like capitalism promotes fascism.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Capitalism -> Fascism.
-
This is an easy problem to solve. Denmark solved their right wing problem years ago. The centre left party adopted slightly tougher immigration policies and the right wing party last half their supporters almost overnight. Poll after poll across Europe finds the same: immigration is a major issue for voters. Get tougher on immigration and watch AfD disappear. It’s the easiest political win in history but so many parties refuse to do it. Bleating about social media influence is a losing battle. The internet is free and will remain free. It’s literally designed to work around censorship like it’s a damaged part of the network.
It worked great for genocide joe and kamalacaust then they passed the torch...
-
This post did not contain any content.
Ok, so shut them down. Block them nationally. I know people will get around it but take some kind of protective measures before it is too late for you.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Do something?
-
BAAAAANNNN THEEEEEEMMMM
Jesus fucking christ if I could go back in time and destroy the internet I would.
I knew a time before the internet. We don't need it. It has brought us great things, but the cons are outweighing it.
-
The AfD won't sweep but they will likely become the 2nd strongest party, after the conservative CDU whose right wing loves the Republicans:
Among others in this image: Former traffic minister Andreas Scheuer, a prominent CDU member (CSU to be more precise but it's basically the same party).
If AfD + CDU achieve a majority it's not unlikely that they will form a coalition - or at the very least vote for the same bills.
Fascism is on a global rise. The fascist Reform UK is surging in British polls, Italy has a fascist government, the fascist ÖVP has gotten the most votes in the recent Austrian election etc etc
Fascism is on a global rise and actively supported by Russia, China and the US. I doubt that democracy can survive efficient Russian disinformation + the full resources of China and the US.
I'd say it will only get worse from here.
We are literally experiencing US disinformation. Trump is on the news telling lies, passing them off as facts. It's being reported, spread, reaching many people.
-
We are literally experiencing US disinformation. Trump is on the news telling lies, passing them off as facts. It's being reported, spread, reaching many people.
Russian disinformation is still more effective as of now. Trump himself is literally just repeating Russian disinformation and not making up lies on his own. The US has not yet become as proficient with the firehose of falsehood as the Russian state due to lack of experience for the most part.
You just cannot build up a Telegram channel network with hundreds of thousands of subscribers posting about how the EU harvests Adrenochrome from babies over night.
-
Spending X on advertising will increase your product sales by Y.
Because it exposes products to customers who were otherwise unaware of their existence or features, not because advertising has special brainwashing powers.
I think there is an implied argument you are making that unless people vote the "correct" way, they're misinformed. I think some people just have different priorities. They care about different things and for this reason, consume different media. I was horrified to learn my wife clicks on ads when she's shopping. Apparently that works for her. It doesn't mean she's wrong. Just that she's not as rigorous about her selection process because she's ultimately happy with the outcome.
Because it exposes products to customers who were otherwise unaware of their existence or features, not because advertising has special brainwashing powers.
I think there is an implied argument you are making that unless people vote the “correct” way, they’re misinformed. I think some people just have different priorities. They care about different things and for this reason, consume different media. I was horrified to learn my wife clicks on ads when she’s shopping. Apparently that works for her. It doesn’t mean she’s wrong. Just that she’s not as rigorous about her selection process because she’s ultimately happy with the outcome.
I personally wouldn't make much of a distinction between "I remotely made a group of people do something they otherwise wouldn't have done" and "I have special brainwashing powers", but that's beside the point. You can look into 'persuasive technology' if you're interested in the current SOTA.
The more pertinent things in this context are the, as you put it, product's "existence or features" - because their existence, quality or veracity of claimed features has no bearing on whether the advertising works. It just does. Convince others that you have the solution to their problem and they will buy it - whether it solves the problem or not. Or go for the good old industry tradition of creating your own market niche by manufacturing demand that previously didn't exist: 1. Convince others that they have a problem and then 2. convince them to buy your solution to it.
We could make a distinction between terminal goals and instrumental goals (if you're interested) but it's not that important, for simplicity's sake I can just agree with "different people having different priorities". And while there's a spectrum, there absolutely are incorrect purchase decisions. Products that don't work, products that don't exist, products that solve problems that you don't have. You can see how this applies to advertising, political will and democratic elections?I deliberately used the word "tricked" earlier, because I think "misinformed" still carries some connotation that there's some onus on the informee here - there isn't. The victim of a con artist is always just that, a victim.
-
No, please, continue to support my arguments. I very much appreciate it.
You're talking to yourself now
