Wait. I really don’t mean this to sound rude here, but I have to ask… they actually needed a study for this??? Because I feel like it’s pretty obvious if one has spent any time working in the real world and not living in a vacuum of privileged wealth.
Yes, in fact it’s the most obvious things which need scientific study most desperately, because what’s “obvious” today may tomorrow be “cigarettes are good for your health”. If something is obvious (and isn’t a value or opinion), that’s a red flag that you should double-check because it might be an overlooked assumption rather than an objective truth. That being said it’s not exactly “sexy” science since the result tends to be “our hypothesis was correct”. The Ig Nobel Prize has some good example of this, dumb “obvious” or “pointless” research that on further reflection makes you think.
You’d be surprised by how much seemingly obvious folk wisdom turns out to be bullshit when scrutiny is applied. It’s good to test the basics, as it can clear up faulty assumptions later. Anti-poor rhetoric is a staple of right-wing propaganda, so it’s nice to have research on our side.
It’s more like we have a hundred years of studies that make this point, but it’s always good to test for different causes of inequality to inform policy better.
The thing with science is that you can’t just accept things because they seem obvious. The scientific method exists for a reason. Sometimes things that look obvious turn out to be false, and sometimes proving an obvious thing to be true is a necessary first step to have a solid foundation from which to build other more nuanced hypotheses. Either way, the point is that studies aren’t all about finding some new and surprising conclusion. Sometimes they’re about taking something you were pretty sure of already, and making it into actual science.
When it’s a mayor getting his house burnt down by far right extremists, no one cares. But when it’s a guy who supports police violence and wants to put the whole country under a totalitarian system, now this is a “milestone in ignominy”.
Not all public discourse is like that, even if some large medias companies lack nuance and focus exclusively on rioters.
An judges union published a press release calling on a political answer to police violence, including repeal of a preemptive self-defense law provision often used to justify such shootings, and making police oversight a more independent process.
Well, we know that the Jan 6th "protesters" are getting 6 months, or maybe a year. The longest I've seen was 18 years to stupid ass Stuart Rhodes. How is what this woman did 9 years worth of time worse?
I understand that can lead to unexploded ordinance however Ukraine is facing a life and death struggle right now and they can use all the ammo that they can get. Of course it's not ideal but US/Europe has very limited supply of precision ammo. And until they can increase production Ukraine needs something to use against dug in Russian positions. Ultimately the decision should be up to Ukrainians since they are the ones that will have to be doing the clean up.
We’ve made enough questionable foreign policy decisions over the centuries, I think we should make him the live-in governor of the British Antarctic Territory. Or not, he’ll probably somehow start a culture war between the Emperor and Adélie penguins.
Last I checked he's been linked to Laure Ferrari. Let's go on a wikipedia adventure:
Laure Ferrari (* 6 October 1979, Épinal, France) has been a close associate of former UKIP leader Nigel Farage, and has been working for several right-wing to far-right political organizations and parties, including the French nationalist party (Debout la France). Ferrari was head of the Institute for Direct Democracy in Europe (IDDE), a Eurosceptic think tank, which was accused in 2017 of having illegally diverted public money to the benefits of UKIP.[1] Ferrari was also founding member of "The Mouvement," together with Mischaël Modrikamen and his wife Yasmine Dehaene-Modrikamen,[2] which in 2018 was joined and promoted by Steve Bannon.
Mischaël Modrikamen (born 22 February 1966)[1] is a Belgian right wing politician and lawyer. ... In March 2015, Modrikamen was invited on an official visit to Russia by the Russian government and met officials at the Duma. Modrikamen, himself a strong believer in the transatlantic alliance, nevertheless announced that "we" should find some accommodation with Russia on the Crimea and Ukraine crisis. ... Modrikamen is the only Belgian political leader to have endorsed Trump, and this from the early beginning of his campaign among Republican contenders.
Reuters reported on October 31, 2018, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is conducting a "wide-ranging" investigation of Bannon's activities during the campaign, including knowledge he may have had about any contacts between Russia and two campaign advisors, George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, as well as his role with Cambridge Analytica.[148] ... In August 2020 members of the senate intelligence committee told the DOJ they believed that Bannon, Jared Kushner, and Donald Trump Jr. may have misled them with their testimony about Russia investigation. ... Bannon has defended Trump's ties to and praise for Russian president Vladimir Putin.[357][372] He expressed a belief that traditionalists see Russia as an ally. Bannon said they "believe that at least Putin is standing up for traditional institutions, and he's trying to do it in a form of nationalism—and I think that people, particularly in certain countries, want to see the sovereignty for their country. They want to see nationalism for their country" rather than a "pan-European Union".[372] According to the book War for Eternity, Bannon met notorious Russian ideologue Aleksandr Dugin in Rome in 2018 to advocate closer relations between the United States and Russia, as well as Traditionalist philosophy ... [etc. etc. etc. etc.]
It's disturbing how much evidence exists that all these right wing parties and politicians are Russian shills, yet it somehow seems to keep escaping common knowledge.
My parents were alive and in schools when segregation in education was ending. Decades of Jim Crow laws holding people down isn't simply remedied by saying "We're all equal now." and doing nothing to redress the damage inflicted through the abuse of governmental power. Especially not when "We're all equal now." is largely lip service and systemic racism is still prevalent.
Saying "oh we'll let some blacks in" isn't a helpful solution
AA had done more harm than good
Now, i do wish we had better solutions that actually address the issues of individuals and communities suffering from poverty and discrimination, but AA does not solve that.
I'd much rather we provide an actual solution, than a solution that looks like one while still being racist and in many ways making the situation worse, in particular by being a target to point to when talking about real solutions as "we already addressed that"
Would love to see a source on this, especially after I left a mod comment explicitly asking for people to be cautious about jumping in with a simplistic take of 'AA bad'.
Literature is extremely mixed on this topic because, perhaps unsurprisingly, it's almost impossible to control for all factors and implementation of AA varies so greatly (explicit diversity goals vs. some kind of equity boost vs. mandatory spots, etc.).
Its sad, but ever since they were bought by Fox in 2015 their magazines stopped being about science, culture, travel and history and instead started pumping out basically bathroom reading for grandparents. Angels, ghosts, jesus, pirates, more jesus, etc etc
Yep. My family were lifelong subscribers to National Geographic Magazine, and I grew up reading it. And I remember distinctly the change in quality when Fox bought it. The first magazine that was put out under the new management was all about the "facts" of the "real" Jesus, and would have been fit for a History Channel special. It was such a disappointment to see something I loved so much turn into a trash rag.
I had no idea that happened, what a sad thing to hear. I haven't read it in a while obviously, but my child is getting close to the age I was when I discovered it and Scientific American. I'm sad I won't get to share National Geographic with them.
Search engines have been becoming increasingly useless for years at this point as SEO gentrification runs rampant and more content moves behind walled gardens like Discord and anything that requires a subscription. Not to mention that Google enshittifies just like everything else. The amount of overly verbose garbage I have to trek through just to not get an answer to my query is far too high. God fucking help us now that AI can generate content, which will be even more garbage to sift through.
You know, that was a good article until the author took a completely unnecessary and irrelevant swipe at Biden; at which point I completely lost interest in anything the author had to say.
I'm really fucking tired of political bullshit being embedded into every-goddamned-thing I read.
Thank goodness someone is here to defend the reactionary fuck who was literally creating a Disinformation Governance Board as part of the ever-expanding police state and its fascist DHS organization. /s
Oh boo hoo. I would have bitched if it was a completely-out-of-place swipe at any politician, even ones I hate. I would have bitched just as much if it was an anti-trump joke. It was irrelevant and obnoxious, shitty, opportunistic writing.
I don’t give fuck one about Biden, but I do give fuck one about journalistic integrity, which the author seems to lack.
Some have suggested that the lack of Google alumni on the transition team of president-elect Joe Biden, a noted sex pest, might bode well for a crackdown, though the presence of veterans from other tech giants like Amazon and Uber suggests otherwise
a completely-out-of-place swipe
Ah. I see you think that reminders that the man in the most powerful position in the world is an actual fucking rapist are totally irrelevant...while that guy is currently helping to dictate what people may and may not see on the Internet. What could go wrong with a rapist deciding to further marginalize rape victims by making them even more invisible?
I disagree with that definition of news. Keeping politicians accountable is certainly one of the functions of the press, but there are a lot of possible news items that don’t refer to politicians. “Winter storms hit [location]” is news, but not related to politicians unless it talks about steps local politicians are taking to prevent storm damage (which is not necessary for a good article). Or “Physicists find [particle they were looking for].” That one could be in Science rather than here, but it is definitely news, and I personally think it’s hard to shoehorn politics into a discussion of particle physics without losing track of what actually happened. Very few politicians involve themselves in that kind of research (though, to be fair, it might be news if they did).
Whether it’s possible to have a purely apolitical news forum is a different question, and I am sure it’s possible to put a political spin on almost anything if you want, but I just don’t think it’s true that news must be political to be news.
No politics is very subjective. Look at the news from Russia in the last few days. That was highly political, and yet very much news everyone had an interest in. Trump’s ongoing indictment is another political game being played, and yet most want to know about it. It is a difficult one to navigate. Me personally I would say politics that has an effect on the people of a nation is news. Inter-party shenanigans is not news for anyone but those who take an avid interest.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.