My favorite Hulk Hogan lie is that he once wrestled 400 days in one year. Not matches, days.
He also claimed to have been approached by Metallica as well as the rolling Stones to be their bass player.
He claimed that he was Darren Aronofsky’s first choice to star in the wrestler. Aronofsky denied this.
Claims he partied with John Belushi after WrestleMania 1. Belushi died 4 years before WrestleMania.
Claims he got a spooky phone message from Roddy Piper after Piper died.
Says Elvis was a Hulkamaniac. Elvis was a big wrestling fan but died years before Hulk Hogan ever set foot in a ring.
Says that the UFC wanted him, and that he fought a couple of Pride fighters in the 80s. Pride wasn’t around till the mid 90s.
Claims he tore every muscle in his back slamming Andre and that Andre died days later. Andre did most of the work on that sham and Hogan didn’t do much lifting, and Andre lived another couple years after this.
That he got tickets for a make a wish kid who wanted to see him win. And saw the kids empty seat at the event and won it for the kids memory
Narcissists tend to sound the same, because it’s all lies about themselves and over inflating their own achievements because they can never get enough, have enough, do enough, etc.
Hogan and trump both would have had legitimate things to be proud of/brag about during their hayday; but because they are the way they are, it was never enough. It always has to be about them, and they have to be the best at everything. Their ego is fragile and any challenge to anything they do is met with extreme aggression to try and hide the fact that most of their accomplishments are made up lies.
Once you start down that path, you can’t walk it back without admitting to every one of the lies you’ve ever told. And they physically can’t do that. Like, their brain will not let them. You’ve seen trump try and acknowledge that he was lying by a judge and the best he can do is admit that the thing he’s saying ISN’T true, but he believes it SHOULD be true, so therefore why shouldn’t he be allowed to say what he personally believes is true, even if nobody else is willing to believe him? He knows that by saying it enough times, people will accept his lies as truth, there’s no reason for him to stop.
Hogan’s the same way. All Narcissists are the same way. It’s their cornerstone behavior.
The tnyt title looks accurate to me: it says Israel is striking Lebanon AND that Israel is casting these strikes as pre-emptive.
The title is not saying that tnyt believes that the strikes are actually pre-emptive, instead it’s reporting that Israel claims that the strikes are pre-emptive. Which is accurate, since Israel does in fact claim that.
Yep, this is a good example of what actual inaccurate/deceitful reporting would be like. Unlike the headlines in the post of the op, your made up title is reporting things that didn’t happened, and your quotes are not things that Hamas’ spokespeople have said. It is vaguely based on things that have happened, but it’s mostly just made up and thus completely inaccurate and deceitful.
The point being made is that they’ll harp unconditionally any old bullshit coming from Israel, putting it in a position of prominence, but not any old bullshit from other sources - even when they say the quote cones from sources in the Israeli government, merely choosing that for prominent position is already promoting it and that source.
Selectivelly and reliably quoting just the one side or always giving more prominence to what is said by just the one side says is an old Propaganda trick for when the Propagandist does not have full information control, and works by the same principle as exploited by lots of far-right populists to rise on saying controversial bullshit and on the criticism of their adversaries: anything given prominence and more attention is internalized by readers/viewers a being more important.
Actual Journalism would treat both sources equally.
Unlike plain-old-lies, such Propaganda Techniques can only be confirmed as such by measuring lots of articles from a news outlet and statistically analysing the words they choose and where they use them by comparison to other outlets, as pointed out in Linkerbaan’s post.
Would you be happier with a title such as “Israeli airstrikes tried to ‘prevent’ a ‘well planned and succesfully executed’ rocket strike from Hezbollah” ?
That just sounds like you want a stupid paper for stupid people, with longer titles
Yeah but your own contribution fits right in there with the 4 examples in the OP. Remember: you can’t use ‘pre-emptive’. That’s a manipulation & narrative control term
Portraying one side as having justification for their acts and the other as acting without reason.
Systematically quoting without confirmation the justifications given by one side, not the other.
The Propaganda technique called “framing” is, quite self-explanatorily, framing (a.k.a. decorating) what is being reported about one side’s actions in one way and what is being reported about the other side differently - the core content which are the events are described the same but only one side’s views on the why for those event are reported.
It’s a far more subtle technique than outright telling the readers “these are the good guys” or using nicer words for the same actions if executed by one side than for the same kind of action when executed by the other side (mind you, at least 3 of these 4 examples will also use this latter technique, which is about “portraying” rather than “framing”)
My contribution frames both sides equally thus both actors seem equally rational in their actions and the justifications for their actions given by both are there with equal prominence. It gives both sides’ justifications to the readers and leaves it to the readers to decide who to believe and which justifications they found valid. That’s how actual Journalism aims to report: giving what they have to the readers and leaving it up to the readers to decide who to believe.
The reason the Israeli airstrikes were cited as pre-emptive is that that adds important information, as in they were aimed at the sites that were about to launch the rockets
Adding that the rocket attack was called retaliatory does not nearly add the same level of information, as everyone already knows what the strike was for and, at the very least, that nearly every strike in this conflict would be called ‘retaliatory’. Again, you’re pleading for stupid news for stupid people.
Should they have added that it was Hezbollah that restarted this bloody back and forth in each and every title as well?
Saying that what they were trying to prevent was a retaliatory attack also adds important information.
In all you comments here you have consistently displayed the underlying logic in your attempts at “arguments” that your side getting its viewpoint and arguments aired should happen whilst the other side getting its viewpoints and arguments aired has all manner of vaguelly defined problems like the “title gets too long” or “imagine if we did this all the way to infinity”, which are “problems” that also apply to your side’s viewpoints (literally dropping “premptive” would make the title shorter and most of those titles are actually unusually long).
You literally apply two different standards for the same kind of information depending on which side it’s helpful for. You might as well just come out and say “I’m with Israel no matter what and I’ll always make excuses up for stopping the enemies of Israel being portrayed as human”.
I see no point in continuing to engage with such a dishonest tribalist since such people are not rational, and in this specific case the side you chose is child mass murderers, which is the most abhorrent faction imaginable for a human being to side with.
This is a religious conflict in which both sides are wrong and evil.
Reading your posts I think it’s pretty clear that it’s you that’s picked a side here that you want to defend. You want to defend it so badly you can’t look at a normal title of a news article anymore without getting angry that it’s not spinned how you’d want it.
They’ll do an outlook: cut features from the desktop version until it’s exactly the same as the web version, because every interface needs to be a facsimile of the web, right?
Software teams solved this a fucking eternity ago through shared component and design libraries. Meanwhile, all of these FAANG companies are out here pushing surveillance tools that are all clearly built by siloed teams with zero collaboration.
Even Microsoft did. Their Office Application libraries are phenomenal.
Scriptable object based libraries that work and do so cross platform. It’s a thing of beauty and I’ve never seen MS ever do anything even remotely like it again.
I think it’s just part of this “move fast” mentality. We’re at a point where we’re forced to move so quickly that things get thrown out the window just to meet a deadline.
Jokes on merge… when a rebase editing goes wrong after +15 commits and six hours, and git hits you with a leadpipe: “do it. Do it again, or reassemble your branch from the reflog.” I.e. you commited a change very early, went over bunch of commits resolving/fixing/improving them and at middle way forget if you should commit --amend or rebase --continue to move forward. Choose wrong, and two large change-sets get irreversilbly squashed together (that absolutely shouldn’t), with no way to undo. Cheers. 👍
This is correct. The Bible talks about giant people all the time. In creationism conventions they’ll talk about all the evidence for giant people all the time (Beware).
I think he thinks by buying the car for $1000 it’s his, contract fulfilled he paid for it noone can take it away.
Ignoring how titles work and how you wouldn’t be able to get ownership transfered to you with the debt on the original vehicle purchase, he seems to think because he is in the clear (because he bought it legally for $1000) his friend won’t still be on the hook for the full price of the contract.
So in his Iala land he would still be screwing his gullible friend over.
My grandfather is/was an electrician for over 60 years. Worked on very important projects in New York City. This rubbed off on me growing up. I spent much of my childhood taking things apart, figuring out how they worked, and putting them back together how I liked. I’ve been working on both hardware and software since I was 11. Had the privilege to study CS formally in high school, and Computer Engineering in university.
Good timing mostly got me into farming, especially since interest rates fell to the floor during the pandemic. Had enough to buy the acreage I wanted, and the wife was interested in helping out. We grow a variety of things now, and not just plants. For example we sell Honey, Soaps, Walnuts, and Mushrooms. It can be hard on the body to be so active all the time, but it is more satisfying than a monitor staring back at you at 3am because of some small incident.
I continue to tinker, and assist startups in my spare time, I can’t imagine I will ever stop programming.
lemmy.world
Active