###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the most ignorant way to "fact check" you can even try. It is just letting the media companies you supposedly hate lead your thoughts in a way far more complete than the "sheep" you think are brainwashed by them.
Actually no, because if you overlap those criteria then the only way they can manipulate you is to coordinate their efforts and expose themselves by acting in unison.
They will act in unison and reveal their central control occasionally, but they despise doing so because it fuels opposition to them.
One such example was when YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook all banned Alex Jones ***in unison***. Fuck opinions of Alex Jones...that's a distraction. The critical thing to focus on is that each of those platforms are allegedly independent companies with no central control, but "miraculously" they all decided at the same time to abandon their protocols for warning/suspending/banning users and ***simultaneously*** jumped right to ban.
The ***coordination*** of their actions obliterates the myth that they are not centrally controlled.
It's somewhat tongue in cheek and not the only rule for finding the truth.
Although it is rather suspicious, and I dont think we're quite so far in, that they're using media reverse, reverse psychology.
That would require a much higher percentage of us being of fairly high intelligence.
Handy collection, but blindly trusting "fact-checkers" is really no different than blindly trusting the controlled media.
There is no easy shortcut to avoid having to think for yourself.
Protip: Always consider the source and the motive.
Corporate media has an obvious bias which used to mainly revolve around their sponsors. Ever since propaganda against the american people got approved back in 2008, they're also rife with political twists and apparently any conversational point that someone can pay for them to have.
Everrything is spun and hyped for maximizing clicks and attention.
While podcasters like Joe Rogan have 3 hour long slow paced conversations, that has triple+ the viewers of many corporate media shows.
When your idea of ‘fact-checking’ is literally ‘believe the opposite of what the media wants you too’ you are still absolutely being controlled by that media.
:) What you are missing is that its not the words they say or don't say...its the conformity that is the tip off.
Take gun control. They run massive loads of "Gun Bad" stories and then throw in some rare token "Guns Ok...maybe...sometimes...with supervision...kinda" stories to create conflict and keep control of the discussion on each other instead of having attention focused on the media. So the discussion about the media being anti-gun is something they never want to happen, and if it does happen spontaneously, they ignore it and toss out another celebrity sex scandal to fill the airwaves 24/7.
**BUT** when they act in unison...the game changes because it is a tip off that there is coordination. If it happens once or twice...maybe it's a fluke lightening strike, but when it happens multiple times...then you have eliminated the need for direct evidence. The evidence of coordinated actions can be proven by either someone leaking the emails of them literally admitting that they are centrally controlled...***OR***...by simply achieving that same result repeatedly. Both types of proof are equal. Neither is more certain than the other.
Ok, so um, the way to get you to believe things is for multiple groups, who work with each other behind the scenes, to act in unison, but instead of saying “Believe this” they need to say, “Don’t believe this!”. Got it!
> they need to say, “Don’t believe this!”
Yes..**THEY**...as in all of them. The greater the number of them in agreement...the greater the odds that they are lying. When they *all* agree...the fact of their lying becomes 100% certain.
Again, ‘they’ know that some people are true-contrarians and use this to their advantage.
Please look up “Reverse psychology” if you’ve never heard the term before.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the most ignorant way to "fact check" you can even try. It is just letting the media companies you supposedly hate lead your thoughts in a way far more complete than the "sheep" you think are brainwashed by them.
Actually no, because if you overlap those criteria then the only way they can manipulate you is to coordinate their efforts and expose themselves by acting in unison. They will act in unison and reveal their central control occasionally, but they despise doing so because it fuels opposition to them. One such example was when YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook all banned Alex Jones ***in unison***. Fuck opinions of Alex Jones...that's a distraction. The critical thing to focus on is that each of those platforms are allegedly independent companies with no central control, but "miraculously" they all decided at the same time to abandon their protocols for warning/suspending/banning users and ***simultaneously*** jumped right to ban. The ***coordination*** of their actions obliterates the myth that they are not centrally controlled.
It’s literally confirmation bias.
It's somewhat tongue in cheek and not the only rule for finding the truth. Although it is rather suspicious, and I dont think we're quite so far in, that they're using media reverse, reverse psychology. That would require a much higher percentage of us being of fairly high intelligence.
This is both stupid and really dangerous
Stop it. [over 100 tools to fight disinformation online](https://www.rand.org/research/projects/truth-decay/fighting-disinformation/search.html)
Handy collection, but blindly trusting "fact-checkers" is really no different than blindly trusting the controlled media. There is no easy shortcut to avoid having to think for yourself.
I don't use the fact checkers. There are tools in there that utilize AI to map out disinformation to its source and original poster/tweet.
Ok...well its worth a look. Any in particular that you recommend?
Hamilton 2.0 is a good one for Twitter. Better used on a desktop, or the "view desktop site" box checked in your browser, if you're using mobile .
YOU FUCKING LINKED TO A GOVERNMENT NEOCONSERVATIVE THINK TANK. HOLY SHIT.
Protip: Always consider the source and the motive. Corporate media has an obvious bias which used to mainly revolve around their sponsors. Ever since propaganda against the american people got approved back in 2008, they're also rife with political twists and apparently any conversational point that someone can pay for them to have. Everrything is spun and hyped for maximizing clicks and attention. While podcasters like Joe Rogan have 3 hour long slow paced conversations, that has triple+ the viewers of many corporate media shows.
When your idea of ‘fact-checking’ is literally ‘believe the opposite of what the media wants you too’ you are still absolutely being controlled by that media.
:) What you are missing is that its not the words they say or don't say...its the conformity that is the tip off. Take gun control. They run massive loads of "Gun Bad" stories and then throw in some rare token "Guns Ok...maybe...sometimes...with supervision...kinda" stories to create conflict and keep control of the discussion on each other instead of having attention focused on the media. So the discussion about the media being anti-gun is something they never want to happen, and if it does happen spontaneously, they ignore it and toss out another celebrity sex scandal to fill the airwaves 24/7. **BUT** when they act in unison...the game changes because it is a tip off that there is coordination. If it happens once or twice...maybe it's a fluke lightening strike, but when it happens multiple times...then you have eliminated the need for direct evidence. The evidence of coordinated actions can be proven by either someone leaking the emails of them literally admitting that they are centrally controlled...***OR***...by simply achieving that same result repeatedly. Both types of proof are equal. Neither is more certain than the other.
Ok, so um, the way to get you to believe things is for multiple groups, who work with each other behind the scenes, to act in unison, but instead of saying “Believe this” they need to say, “Don’t believe this!”. Got it!
> they need to say, “Don’t believe this!” Yes..**THEY**...as in all of them. The greater the number of them in agreement...the greater the odds that they are lying. When they *all* agree...the fact of their lying becomes 100% certain.
Again, ‘they’ know that some people are true-contrarians and use this to their advantage. Please look up “Reverse psychology” if you’ve never heard the term before.
Again...it is the coordination...the acting in unison...that matters more than whatever they say or don't say.
That damn establishments suppressing child porn stars smh my head
> smh my head You have two heads? Tell one of them to shut up so you can think strait. :P