Forum Propaganda

Ben Hadad

Sure, we all believe that posters on forum boards are just your run of the mill Joe random giving their own personal opinions. But that may not always be the case. I only refer to the the links below as I have noticed that on various other forum boards that people are putting in alot of their own personal time defending Isreals recent actions in international waters.

I'm also by no means just aiming this at Isreal, it's just that they are more conspicious at the moment, but I wish this to be levelled at any interest group.

Anyway to be honest this does not surprise me at all really, but I would just like to alert people that there is a very strong possiblity that some peoples intentions may not appear as independent as one would persume, and I feel that this is important for people to know.


http://rinf.com/alt-news/contributions/israeli-hires-internet-soldiers/6148/

http://www.thejidf.org/

“Of course,” says Shturman. “Our people will not say: ‘Hello, I am from the policy-explanation department of the Israeli Foreign Ministry and I want to tell you the following.’ Nor will they necessarily identify themselves as Israelis. They will speak as net-surfers and as citizens, and will write responses that will look personal but will be based on a prepared list of messages that the Foreign Ministry developed.

The Foreign Ministry admits that the inspiration comes from none other than the much-reviled field of compensated commercial talkback: employees of companies and public-relations firms who post words of praise on the Internet for those who sent them there – the company that is their employer or their client. The professional responders normally identify themselves as chance readers of the article they are responding to or as “satisfied customers” of the company they are praising.

Eliot Rosewater

Ben Hadad wrote: »

I have noticed that on various other forum boards that people are putting in alot of their own personal time defending Isreals recent actions in international waters.

And a lot of people are putting in their own personal time criticizing Israel too. Your rationale appears to be "people are posting on a forum, hence they are pushing propaganda". But surely this could be applied to every discussion here; at the end of the day everyone is communicating their opinion.

In either case, it doesn't matter. Whatever someone's motivation, they will be dealt with it the same manner. If their views have merit, they will be appreciated; if they do not, they will be criticized.

Ben Hadad wrote: »

I'm also by no means just aiming this at Isreal, it's just that they are more conspicious at the moment, but I wish this to be levelled at any interest group.

I find it interesting that you single out Israel, given that about 75% of the posts on the issue here are leveled against Israel. If I were to harbor the kind of conspiratorial theory you do (which I don't), I would be applying it to the group that's making the most noise, that being the aim, presumably of co-ordinated propaganda.

johngalway

It seems to me, a lot of people who agree with the larger motives Israel has for boarding the aid ships in particular get accused of being PR agents for Israel - just for giving their own opinion. It also seems to me that people who agree with Israel get a torrent of abuse for having a different point of view than those who do not agree with Israel. I happen to agree with what they did, though it doesn't seem to have gone to plan.

ei.sdraob

@Eliot Rosewater

there is a actually an organized community who get alerted and descend on any Israel related threads on various sites and blogs
they are called GIYUS

call it propaganda, pr control, trolling or information warfare > whatever

but these people/organizations do exist

old hippy

ei.sdraob wrote: »

@Eliot Rosewater

there is a actually an organized community who get alerted and descend on any Israel related threads on various sites and blogs
they are called GIYUS

call it propaganda, pr control, trolling or information warfare > whatever

but these people/organizations do exist

I knew it! I tried to explain this kind of thing on another site and was told that I was being anti-semitic for suggesting it

sceptre

(quick note, my post here is a personal view, not a statement of forum or site policy and other mods might well disagree with the contents. Most of you will realise that anyway, just making it clear)

This story is a year old and was discussed at length a year ago. There's nothing new here. A quick look at some sites, even some Irish (I'm not going to name them but you know where they are), that claim to be "independent news wires" will easily reveal that some people have such strong views on such subjects that they post on little else. Their own status as independent news sources is questionable as a result. As it happens, I have some Israeli friends and some Palestinian friends and they've been talking about nothing else on the Internet for the past week, so much so that coming here is actually a bit of a time-out for me (yes, even considering the length of the discussions here).

People were accused of this during the Lisbon debates (ei.sdraob in particular may remember that and there were many more) when there's little evidence for more than great interest and a staunch point of view. We'll just keep discussing things here on the boards Politics forum as we always have done, attempting to keep the platform itself as neutral as possible so that opposing points of view have somewhere to come together and discuss things. I emphasise my own views on anti-idiocy for good reason. It's the exchange of views that is most important as Eliot Rosewater correctly highlighted above.

People come here and put arguments forward for or against any number of things. Some people are multi-trick ponies, some are one-trick ponies. Some people post useful contributions and views and some people probably shouldn't bother. That's the nature of the Internet, that's where its nature lies as a good medium for discussion. As a moderator I make no bones about declaring that I don't care what anyone's views are on almost anything, all I care about is how they put their view forward and whether or not they can refrain from personalising the discussion, posting abuse and whether or not they can remember to deal with the topic (playing the ball) rather than making it about the other member posting (playing the man). I'm sure these organisations running people across the Internet to ply a case exist, I just don't care - it's the views and how they're presented that make all the difference.

I don't want to get specific about the IL/PS threads but there are some very ardent posters there on both sides, intent on making their case and winning the argument. We've seen the same in threads in particular about the Lisbon Treaty, immigration, Northern Ireland etc. If people come here with a good case, regardless of why they're here, they'll do well. If they come here with a bad case, regardless of why they're here, they'll get pummelled to death by people with a better case. We've seen that in almost every example of a thread with ardent members so far - it's always the case and the argument that "wins" discussions, never the motivation.

This is the best paragraph of the thread so far:

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In either case, it doesn't matter. Whatever someone's motivation, they will be dealt with it the same manner. If their views have merit, they will be appreciated; if they do not, they will be criticized.

I suspect when the thread ends, it will still be the best paragraph of the thread. Kudos Eliot, a good point well made.

sceptre

Thread reopened. With my moderator hat firmly on, I'd remind people to bear in mind what the topic actually is.

/mod

Ben Hadad

Again, this is is no way aimed solely at Israel and I do not want to specifically aim it at any group in particluar. It is aimed at propaganda.

These practices are practically impossible to police and I would be even against attempts to even try to police it as any attempt would only inpinge on basic freedoms of speech.

However if this thread does any thing I would hope it may foster some scepticism, sceptism that perceived popular opinon and perceived unpopular opinon is not indicative of basis in merit, as these can potentially be distorted.

Only careful consideration of all available facts, and careful consideration of the motivations behind the sources of these facts, reconciled with ones personal morality and rationality, has basis as personal opinion. If these are lacking then one must question ones independece.

If people wish to question my independece, I am only wishing to highlight propaganda. Therefore if you wish to call me a propagandist for the anti-propaganda party please go ahead.

Fuhrer

ei.sdraob wrote: »

@Eliot Rosewater

there is a actually an organized community who get alerted and descend on any Israel related threads on various sites and blogs
they are called GIYUS

call it propaganda, pr control, trolling or information warfare > whatever

but these people/organizations do exist

Thing I like about that tool is that anyone can sign up, log on to the Blog, thread or whatever and warn everyone that its just an attempt to fix opinion

Scofflaw

sceptre wrote: »

Thread reopened. With my moderator hat firmly on, I'd remind people to bear in mind what the topic actually is.

/mod

To clarify that - this thread is about use of the Internet / social media by political activists to push their particular point of view in an organised way.

It's not an opportunity to "name and shame" posters you believe are doing this - that will be treated in the usual way.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Memnoch

Thank you for re-opening this discussion.

I personally have a problem with people who come to these forums to specifically push a particular political agenda but have no interest in becoming a member of, or contributing to the wider community at all.

This is compounded by the fact that such posters usually express utterly intractable views and cannot be convinced to change their stance or accept a mistake in their stance or reasoning on any issue (though this perhaps might be argued of many regulars also). No matter how strong the argument or evidence, they always find a way to say "I disagree." This on its own wouldn't be a problem if they didn't resort to rehashing arguments that seemed to have reached a conclusion a while back, and not just reshashing them but restating positions that may have been quite thoroughly refuted in such a way that the refutation might not have happened at all.

The modus operandi doesn't seem to be to add to genuine debate, but to simply flood the debate with endless circles and thus dilute the issue at hand and prevent a real and balanced discussion of the subject.

I personally am not in favour of posters joining boards simply to propagandize in this manner and feel that in order to keep the debate healthy there should be some sort of restriction on participation in political discussion (especially in instances where there is clear evidence that there is a pattern of this kind of behaviour - such as every time Israel is involved in a humanitarian incident) of people who seem to have joined specifically for that purpose.

I understand the difficulty of creating such rules without potentially disenfranchising someone, but as it stands, the situation feels intolerable.

gandalf

Personally I find organised propaganda efforts to mirror those commercial shills. They are selling their "product" which maybe a defense for a particular incident like the one recently, pushing a particular party or ideal (like anti-abortion or race related for example). The people carrying out this may be part of that movement or could even be paid to push a certain agenda. I actually believe that some would even be following a script that they may not even believe.

From a boards perspective if uncovered these propaganda shills should be dealt with like commercial shills and have their access to push their "manufactured" ideas shut down.

thebaldsoprano

Memnoch wrote: »

This is compounded by the fact that such posters usually express utterly intractable views and cannot be convinced to change their stance or accept a mistake in their stance or reasoning on any issue (though this perhaps might be argued of many regulars also). No matter how strong the argument or evidence, they always find a way to say "I disagree." This on its own wouldn't be a problem if they didn't resort to rehashing arguments that seemed to have reached a conclusion a while back, and not just reshashing them but restating positions that may have been quite thoroughly refuted in such a way that the refutation might not have happened at all.

The modus operandi doesn't seem to be to add to genuine debate, but to simply flood the debate with endless circles and thus dilute the issue at hand and prevent a real and balanced discussion of the subject.

This expresses my sentiments on the threads relating to recent events a lot better than I could do. I find Boards a very handy place to get at least something of an informed opinion on current affairs, whether it's by participating in threads or just following them. Participating does mean being wrong on occasion though, something that seems to be completely lost on some posters to these threads. This makes an otherwise interesting and informative debate a lot harder to follow.

There's an interesting article here about a web propaganda group in China known as the "50 Cent Party" - it's hard to see how groups such as these offering "public opinion guidance" can add to a debate.

billy the squid

This just appeared on CNN, Israeli government apologise for "we mock the world" video which was distributed virally . question is, are they apologising because they are sorry or because they were busted.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/05/gaza.flotilla.mock.video/

Also doing the intertube rounds was this "go back to Auswitz" radio exchange that it was claimed was said during a communications exchange between the israelis and the first flotilla. the IDF admitted now that the initial clip was edited, but claim that they removed only periods where there was no conversation.

http://idfspokesperson.com/2010/06/05/clarificationcorrection-regarding-audio-transmission-between-israeli-navy-and-flotilla-on-31-may-2010-posted-on-5-june-2010/

Had the full conversation been released in a more timely fashion, then perhaps it might have been given more analisys while the story was in the attention of the media.

Now that the story has come to a conclusion, it will be left for the crazies to discuss, the Alex Jones' of the world who will be ignored.

Ben Hadad

billy the squid wrote: »

This just appeared on CNN, Israeli government apologise for "we mock the world" video which was distributed virally . question is, are they apologising because they are sorry or because they were busted.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/05/gaza.flotilla.mock.video/

This is slightly different to what we are talking about as the video was openly distributed from Isreal and its source was well known.

sponsoredwalk

Ben Hadad wrote: »

I would just like to alert people that there is a very strong possiblity that some peoples intentions may not appear as independent as one would persume, and I feel that this is important for people to know.

With all due respect, what does that have to do with anything?

For one thing, you have like 15 posts on boards at the moment so if we're going to use the logic purported in your post then we should rightly be skeptical of your intentions with this very post.

Luckily, we are not all out on witch-hunts when discussing issues.

If a thread is hijacked by some people in favour of Israel's blockade, or against Israel's policy, or whatever the case may be I do not see how the fact that they are part of some organization demeans their position.

It could even possibly strengthen their position.

Why?

Because what matters in an argument is the argument, not the person, (if we're willing to be serious). They may be privy to some new information in belonging to some organization, who knows.

Your post really reeks to me of an attempt to try to stir up psychological discord & have posters focus on ulterior motives seperate from the argument at hand. I feel justified in focusing on the possibility of your ulterior motives seeing as this thread is precisely about the topic, if you pulled out comments about Mr. X being the Israeli prime ministers son* in a thread it wouldn't invalidate his argument unless he was arguing for Palestine when publicly he was known to support Israel

* Purely hypothetical scenario

Ben Hadad

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

With all due respect, what does that have to do with anything?

It is my wish to begin a general discussion on the use of the internet and forum boards, as a means by which interest groups use to influence public opinion in a way that is disingenuous.

For one thing, you have like 15 posts on boards at the moment so if we're going to use the logic purported in your post then we should rightly be skeptical of your intentions with this very post.

I know of no reason why post count should affect my right to start this discussion. Also as I have said already, I am only trying to raise the existence of propaganda on the internet. If you wish to call me a propagandist for the anti porpaganda party please do.

Luckily, we are not all out on witch-hunts when discussing issues.

I most definitely am not on a witch hunt. I have already stated that this cannot be policed and have already stated that I am against trying to police it.

If a thread is hijacked by some people in favour of Israel's blockade, or against Israel's policy, or whatever the case may be I do not see how the fact that they are part of some organization demeans their position.

I really do not want this thread to focus on Isreal at all, I wish it to be general in nature. And if you cannot see how organised opposition to indivdual public opinion is harmful to public discourse, fair enough.

Why?

Because what matters in an argument is the argument, not the person, (if we're willing to be serious). They may be privy to some new information in belonging to some organization, who knows.

Your post really reeks to me of an attempt to try to stir up psychological discord & have posters focus on ulterior motives seperate from the argument at hand. I feel justified in focusing on the possibility of your ulterior motives seeing as this thread is precisely about the topic, if you pulled out comments about Mr. X being the Israeli prime ministers son* in a thread it wouldn't invalidate his argument unless he was arguing for Palestine when publicly he was known to support Israel

* Purely hypothetical scenario

Sorry I lost you on this one.

sponsoredwalk

What I meant by focusing on the 15 posts is that you could be one of these people who have just signed up over the few days since the Floatilla incident to spread propaganda.

I seriously don't mean to say that you are, only to point out how it could be true & that even if it is it really shouldn't matter because what matters are facts in a situation like this and if some organization hijacks a thread offering facts and cogent arguments then how is that negative?

Lol, I'm only focusing on Israel because you mentioned it in your post.

As for your first point, I don't see how interest groups can influence much opinion on internet forums with mis-information when you have all of the info at your fingertips ala google, unless you don't question everything you read

Memnoch

And if you cannot see how organised opposition to indivdual public opinion is harmful to public discourse, fair enough.

QFT.

Scofflaw

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

What I meant by focusing on the 15 posts is that you could be one of these people who have just signed up over the few days since the Floatilla incident to spread propaganda.

I seriously don't mean to say that you are, only to point out how it could be true & that even if it is it really shouldn't matter because what matters are facts in a situation like this and if some organization hijacks a thread offering facts and cogent arguments then how is that negative?

Lol, I'm only focusing on Israel because you mentioned it in your post.

As for your first point, I don't see how interest groups can influence much opinion on internet forums with mis-information when you have all of the info at your fingertips ala google, unless you don't question everything you read

Essentially, by creating a false impression of consensus. People are social beings - if there's a strong trend in a particular direction, they find it emotionally hard to go against it.

Arguing for a Yes during the Lisbon discussions was really tough in Lisbon 1, and became a lot easier in Lisbon 2, and correspondingly harder for the No posters. When I say tough I mean that it was constantly tempting just to stop posting - after all, why put yourself through an uphill battle just because you happen to favour a particular position? Yes, you can look things up on Google, but unless you're willing to just grab the first thing that comes to hand, it's still hard work.

Part of what makes it hard is that when a forum floods with posts running a certain way, you're constantly going over the same ground - then there's the lack of support, and the fact that 5 or 6 other posters are going to pick apart everything you say, deride your position, question your intelligence / sanity / motivation etc, while slapping each other on the back and high-fiving every time they feel one of their guys has said something telling.

So if you can "flood" discussion forums - relatively easy, a handful of determined posters can do it - and if you think discussion forums are influential in shaping opinion, then it's worth doing, because you can create a false impression of consensus.

And unfortunately the point that it's about the argument not the poster doesn't really hold up, either, because the idea here is not discussion, but the creation of a barrage of PR - these days, that means an onslaught of YouTube videos, photos, soundbites, and leading factoids. In a well-organised campaign, you won't even be getting these for yourself - they're supplied by a central source, or a couple of central sources. Why does that make a difference? Because it means that all the material can have a consistent, centrally decided message, and whatever is found to be working best can be rapidly shared around the network of activists.

As to the Israeli online organisations like GIYUS, and the Megaphone software, that's not in any way a conspiracy theory - it's just a way of pointing people who want to support Israel to where they can do it online, and providing them the material to do so. It's well known - came out roughly around the time of the Lebanon invasion.

Done well, and with enough volunteer manpower, you can really create an enormous volume of supportive forum posts, blog comments, blog posts, news comments, etc etc. It's not hard - it takes organisation, and it takes committed volunteers. In one sense, you're not seeing anything other than people who genuinely believe they're right - not paid shills - but they're being (a) pointed at the discussions, and (b) fed material, so if necessary they can just duck in, dump the material, and duck out without engaging.

It's that latter aspect - the "everyone on message, don't engage, just hit them with the material and a brief message, rinse, repeat" - that makes it a problem for discussion forums. Unmoderated and weakly moderated forums are pretty much just going to be swamped in enough YouTube videos to drown out discussion.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

Essentially, by creating a false impression of consensus. People are social beings - if there's a strong trend in a particular direction, they find it emotionally hard to go against it.

Arguing for a Yes during the Lisbon discussions was really tough in Lisbon 1, and became a lot easier in Lisbon 2, and correspondingly harder for the No posters. When I say tough I mean that it was constantly tempting just to stop posting - after all, why put yourself through an uphill battle just because you happen to favour a particular position? Yes, you can look things up on Google, but unless you're willing to just grab the first thing that comes to hand, it's still hard work.

Part of what makes it hard is that when a forum floods with posts running a certain way, you're constantly going over the same ground - then there's the lack of support, and the fact that 5 or 6 other posters are going to pick apart everything you say, deride your position, question your intelligence / sanity / motivation etc, while slapping each other on the back and high-fiving every time they feel one of their guys has said something telling.

So if you can "flood" discussion forums - relatively easy, a handful of determined posters can do it - and if you think discussion forums are influential in shaping opinion, then it's worth doing, because you can create a false impression of consensus.

And unfortunately the point that it's about the argument not the poster doesn't really hold up, either, because the idea here is not discussion, but the creation of a barrage of PR - these days, that means an onslaught of YouTube videos, photos, soundbites, and leading factoids. In a well-organised campaign, you won't even be getting these for yourself - they're supplied by a central source, or a couple of central sources. Why does that make a difference? Because it means that all the material can have a consistent, centrally decided message, and whatever is found to be working best can be rapidly shared around the network of activists.

As to the Israeli online organisations like GIYUS, and the Megaphone software, that's not in any way a conspiracy theory - it's just a way of pointing people who want to support Israel to where they can do it online, and providing them the material to do so. It's well known - came out roughly around the time of the Lebanon invasion.

Done well, and with enough volunteer manpower, you can really create an enormous volume of supportive forum posts, blog comments, blog posts, news comments, etc etc. It's not hard - it takes organisation, and it takes committed volunteers. In one sense, you're not seeing anything other than people who genuinely believe they're right - not paid shills - but they're being (a) pointed at the discussions, and (b) fed material, so if necessary they can just duck in, dump the material, and duck out without engaging.

It's that latter aspect - the "everyone on message, don't engage, just hit them with the material and a brief message, rinse, repeat" - that makes it a problem for discussion forums. Unmoderated and weakly moderated forums are pretty much just going to be swamped in enough YouTube videos to drown out discussion.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Its funny then that this board is absolutely flooded with anti-Israel threads and posters at the moment.

Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its funny then that this board is absolutely flooded with anti-Israel threads and posters at the moment.

If you can point to a pro-Palestinian version of GIYUS, I'd be very interested. However, this thread isn't about Israel, and one of the marker points for a forum flood is new registered posters. The overwhelming majority of newly registered posters appearing in the Israel threads are pro-Israel.

cordially,
Scofflaw

youcrazyjesus!

Ben Hadad wrote: »

Sure, we all believe that posters on forum boards are just your run of the mill Joe random giving their own personal opinions. But that may not always be the case. I only refer to the the links below as I have noticed that on various other forum boards that people are putting in alot of their own personal time defending Isreals recent actions in international waters.

I'm also by no means just aiming this at Isreal, it's just that they are more conspicious at the moment, but I wish this to be levelled at any interest group.

Anyway to be honest this does not surprise me at all really, but I would just like to alert people that there is a very strong possiblity that some peoples intentions may not appear as independent as one would persume, and I feel that this is important for people to know.


http://rinf.com/alt-news/contributions/israeli-hires-internet-soldiers/6148/

http://www.thejidf.org/

Posters have appeared on here after big events in Palestine, one or two, not many. This forum would be on Israeli intelligence's radar give he number of visitors and how high it ranks in Google searches. I just wish they'd send more intelligent people to debate the subject.


*makes tinfoil hat*

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

If you can point to a pro-Palestinian version of GIYUS, I'd be very interested. However, this thread isn't about Israel, and one of the marker points for a forum flood is new registered posters. The overwhelming majority of newly registered posters appearing in the Israel threads are pro-Israel.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Flood? I haven't read every single post on every single thread but the only new posters who I can recall are Zakaisomething who seemed a bit "emotional" and Bamboozle who I can't quite figure out. On the pro-Palestinian side I can think of perhaps Musings who seemed to come from nowhere, I don't see a flood of new posters from either side.

What I can see though is something you pointed out in your post which is a weights of opinion that dosen't seem to exist necessarily in wider society. Hardly anyone I know in rl has ventured an opinion either for or against yet it seems to dominate the politics forum this week.

In the pro-Gaza march today less than a thousand turned up which inidicates a general lack of interest in the wider public, far more people turned up to an anti hunt-ban protest a couple of months ago. Its things like this that would indicate that anti-Israel opinion has a disproportionate weighting on this forum as compared to Irish society in general.

RATM

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

If a thread is hijacked by some people in favour of Israel's blockade, or against Israel's policy, or whatever the case may be I do not see how the fact that they are part of some organization demeans their position.

It could even possibly strengthen their position.

Why?

Because what matters in an argument is the argument, not the person, (if we're willing to be serious). They may be privy to some new information in belonging to some organization, who knows.

Not necessarily. If you look over on the Commuting & Transport forum you'll see there is a stickied thread called 'Conflicts of Interest' there requesting that posters who have a vested interest in that sphere declare their interest.

In the Accomodation & Property forum (lately) anyone who talks up the property market gets labelled as an Estate Agent/Auctioneer. Why? Because if you look back on the historical posts on that forum you'll see there was plenty of Estate Agents on there talking up the property market during the bubble. Now people on that forum are wary (rightly so IMO) of it happening again.

Now politics is far more ambigious, but the OP does have a valid point- there are folks out there who are organised enough to hit forums like these when flashpoints arise. I'm not saying they are not entitled to their opinion, of course not.

But one of the main tools of propaganda is disinformation. Goebbels was famous for the dictum that if you tell a big lie and tell it often enough then sooner or later the people will believe it. This is just a more modern version of that dictum- these groups are the method in achieving the often in that statement. And they do so by trying to up an articles status/popularity on Facebook/Forums, etc. People are of course entitled to their opinion but when that opinion is a moving part of a propaganda machine which is masquerading as a supposedly independent voice then it is up to all of us to question it.

alastair

The trick is to factcheck the bejasus out of all the rhetoric/misinformation and allow people the space to form an informed opinion. Things get a lot clearer when you remove the bull**** surrounding it.

Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Flood? I haven't read every single post on every single thread but the only new posters who I can recall are Zakaisomething who seemed a bit "emotional" and Bamboozle who I can't quite figure out. On the pro-Palestinian side I can think of perhaps Musings who seemed to come from nowhere, I don't see a flood of new posters from either side.

Actually, I wasn't really suggesting that we've had a flood this time. Lebanon invasion, certainly, but it hasn't been particularly a flood this time - more of a trickle. Again, though - this isn't about this particular occasion.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

What I can see though is something you pointed out in your post which is a weights of opinion that dosen't seem to exist necessarily in wider society. Hardly anyone I know in rl has ventured an opinion either for or against yet it seems to dominate the politics forum this week.

In the pro-Gaza march today less than a thousand turned up which inidicates a general lack of interest in the wider public, far more people turned up to an anti hunt-ban protest a couple of months ago. Its things like this that would indicate that anti-Israel opinion has a disproportionate weighting on this forum as compared to Irish society in general.

That may well be the case - forum users are certainly not necessarily representative of general society. However, boards.ie has been quite representative quite often.

In terms of political discussion in general, though, people are often more cautious about engaging on really contentious subject like Israel in real life, because you can't just turn away if it turns out the person you're speaking to is passionate about the subject. Also, Irish people really don't discuss politics - there was a Eurobarometer that asked, and the result was much lower for Ireland than the EU average.

cordially,
Scofflaw

sponsoredwalk

Scofflaw wrote: »

Part of what makes it hard is that when a forum floods with posts running a certain way, you're constantly going over the same ground - then there's the lack of support, and the fact that 5 or 6 other posters are going to pick apart everything you say, deride your position, question your intelligence / sanity / motivation etc, while slapping each other on the back and high-fiving every time they feel one of their guys has said something telling.

Well I get where your coming from but in practice sticking to the facts is the absolute best way to cut past the nonsense, even if it is 5 or 6 posters going ad hominem on you

If people aren't aware of the facts then it's obvious, I only mention googling because it is a way to quickly bring up proof for assertion X that you're making to validate the general point you're getting at. Again, if you don't already know what you're looking for then you shouldn't be posting on the subject in an interlocutor position, it always shows when you don't know what you're talking about or are arguing from a baseless platform.

I could show you about 4 arguments on boards where this method of conversation really worked :cool: (and one I have planned for the future ).

Since the Israel question is on everyone's minds I've got a perfect example of what we're talking about.

Norman Finkelstein, who I hope everyone will google, has been the brunt of so much derision & has lost his job over his political views yet he is right in that he argues the Israel-Palestine conflict is not difficult or impossible to comprehend. The point is that he continually sticks to the facts regardless of the insults & continues to go strong.

Youtube and youku have a few amazing videos, really worth watching. These videos are just lectures that represent the meticulously detailed body of work of his in print, hardly just dredging up random tidbits to assert my 100% absolutely true perspective :pac:

RATM, my view on these people using Goebbel's little brainwashing technique is to just ignore them, there are plenty of people in the world who can get past the nonsense by themselves, i.e critical thinking. If we're able to talk about this and see it for what it is, calling a spade a spade, then there's hope

Scofflaw

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Well I get where your coming from but in practice sticking to the facts is the absolute best way to cut past the nonsense, even if it is 5 or 6 posters going ad hominem on you

If people aren't aware of the facts then it's obvious, I only mention googling because it is a way to quickly bring up proof for assertion X that you're making to validate the general point you're getting at. Again, if you don't already know what you're looking for then you shouldn't be posting on the subject in an interlocutor position, it always shows when you don't know what you're talking about or are arguing from a baseless platform.

I could show you about 4 arguments on boards where this method of conversation really worked :cool: (and one I have planned for the future ).

Since the Israel question is on everyone's minds I've got a perfect example of what we're talking about.

Norman Finkelstein, who I hope everyone will google, has been the brunt of so much derision & has lost his job over his political views yet he is right in that he argues the Israel-Palestine conflict is not difficult or impossible to comprehend. The point is that he continually sticks to the facts regardless of the insults & continues to go strong.

Yes - my point is that that's hard work that most people are not up for (unless one is autistic, in which case I suspect the whole of life feels like that). That's why we respect people who can hold out against the majority opinion without losing their grasp on facts.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Youtube and youku have a few amazing videos, really worth watching. These videos are just lectures that represent the meticulously detailed body of work of his in print, hardly just dredging up random tidbits to assert my 100% absolutely true perspective :pac:

RATM, my view on these people using Goebbel's little brainwashing technique is to just ignore them, there are plenty of people in the world who can get past the nonsense by themselves, i.e critical thinking. If we're able to talk about this and see it for what it is, calling a spade a spade, then there's hope

I don't think anyone said there's no hope!

cordially,
Scofflaw

Fuhrer

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its funny then that this board is absolutely flooded with anti-Israel threads and posters at the moment.

And flooded with people who want to criticize every thread for being Anti-Israeli

BlaasForRafa

Fuhrer wrote: »

And flooded with people who want to criticize every thread for being Anti-Israeli

This is the politics forum yet it is increasingly looking like the anti-Israel forum or middle-east forum. I, or anyone else has every right to point out threads that are frivilous or redundant.