Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Lying Dogs Will Put You to Sleep


     In the previous article, More Than One Way for a Dog to Lie, we began examining the Bipartisan Report and showing how they intentionally inflame and misinform readers with propaganda.  Here, we finish our examination of how propaganda puts one's reasoning faculties to sleep and then offer some tips to prevent your mind from being euthanized by garbage media.

BREAKING: House Appropriations Committee Relinquishes Trump Of Wartime Power i

     This Bipartisan Report story begins with the statement that “Trump’s power to wage war in the Middle East is being ripped away from him, and it’s safe to say Trump’s fragile ego is taking quite the pounding Thursday morning. ii”  If that happened, then it is an unquestionably harsh rebuke for Trump.   Apparently, it did happen because a few paragraphs later the article states that “as of Thursday, Trump no longer has the authority to wage war without a determination process with actual members of government.”    Wow, we can’t wait to see the tweets about this!

     Make no mistake, if the House and Senate have agreed to limit Trump’s wartime powers as commander-in-chief, then he has lost an incredible amount of support in Congress.  If we read the tea leaves to divine and foresee what this means in other areas of politics, it is safe to assume that his support in Congress is dropping like a hot rock.  Of course, his loyalists surely attempted to block that bill, so it had to pass the Senate with 60 votes.   Also, to even get enough Republicans, who are still drunk from their tea party, to approve this bill might have been an even bigger hurdle.  We also know that the president would never approve this.  That means this bill passed with a veto-proof majority of 2/3 in each chamber.  This wasn’t just a slap in the face; it was a hair-pulling pimp-slap to the president.  If his support in Congress has dropped this far, then we should certainly expect to see congressional hearings accelerate and should be hearing talk of impeachment from even moderate Republicans.  First, though, where was all the coverage of those things when they happened?




     The reason we did not see that explosive news coverage is because, in the very next paragraph of this fake propaganda piece, Bipartisan Report does a 180° turnaround and states what actually happened: the House Appropriations Committee approved an amendment to revoke the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) in a bill that is under discussion in that committee.  If the writers at Bipartisan Report ever read this blog post, then I really hope they review some basic civics iii.

     They forgot to mention that the bill must actually be voted out of committee before it can be approved by the House, and that, once approved by the House, it goes before the Senate. Neither chamber has voted on this bill yet. They also forgot to mention that Trump would either have to sign the bill before it became law or both houses of Congress would have to override his veto with a 2/3 majority in each chamber.  They also conveniently forgot to mention that the Congresslady who proposed the amendment is also the only current member of Congress that didn’t support the original AUMF under President Bush 15 years ago.

To help the Bipartisan Report review grade-school-level civics.

      Bipartisan Report’s propaganda headline says that Congress “relinquishes” the president’s power 1.  Using the present tense here implies something pretty immediate.  Even if this measure were approved by both houses, it would be vetoed and then have to be passed by both houses again by at least a 2/3 vote in both houses.  That would take at least a week or two if Congress were determined and saw it as a major issue.  The amendment itself, shown in the Bipartisan Report article, says that it does not go into effect until 8 months after it is made law.  Consider all the stupid and damaging things that Trump has done in the 6 months that he has been in office so far.  He could still start a war through his incompetence in the 8-month timespan that he would have left under this bill.  

      (If this bill were actually passed over his veto, however, we would expect that his military advisors would be extremely reluctant to engage ISIS militarily during that 8 months unless they had prior approval from Congress.  But, then again, Trump does not seem to heed advice from others.  So, in effect, there might be an actual immediate effect, if the bill were actually passed.  This is nothing more than arguing a counterfactual: saying, if this happened, then that would happen.  That is not what this article purports to do, however.)

     We hope that the reader noticed that in this final propaganda article from Bipartisan Report, we did not even have to go to another source to attempt to verify the accuracy of the report 2.  The article contradicts itself multiple times.  It also shows an appalling lack of understanding of basic civics.  What is likely to happen to people who don’t read this carefully or who may have forgotten some of the details of our legislative process since they were in school?  Shouldn’t we expect an organization that presents itself as a political news organization to have a grasp of basic civics?

Do you seriously want to let your personal credibility hang on information from a blatant propaganda site?


     As we reported in the Elephant in the Mind, the brain does not have a delete key to automatically remove bad information.  Even if we discover later that the information is bad, a brain first has to process “information” before it can process “NOT information.”  This means that Bipartisan Report’s false propaganda will stay in the brain even after one learns that it is bad information.  As time goes on, one may not be able to reliably recall whether the information is true or not.  If a person thought it was true for a significant time before they learned it was false, then the likelihood of misremembering as time goes on increases.  That means the likelihood of arguing based on falsehoods and making oneself look like an idiot increases multiple times.

     For people that do not scrutinize the article closely 3, they could reasonably conclude that Trump’s support in Congress has become a razor-thin sheet of ice that he may fall through at any moment.  It is then rational to conclude that the intensity of investigations concerning Russian collusion must be intensifying and that we should expect even Republican Congressfolk to begin talking openly about impeachment.  Then, when another month or two go by and investigations remain at their seemingly slow pace and no Republicans call for Trump’s impeachment, what happens?  They will likely become even more angry and frustrated than they are by reading the inflaming rhetoric of Bipartisan Report’s propaganda.  Let’s consider 3 possible outcomes from that increased anger.

Articles in the Fake News Series:

     First, they may decide that all politics are corrupt, disengage completely, and not bother to even vote anymore.  These are people who would otherwise be a reliable liberal vote.  In this scenario, this propaganda robs the left of support.  Second, they may continue to rant and rave based on obvious and easily demonstrable falsehoods.  As we have argued in this series, this makes not only the person posting look stupid 4 but also the entire left looks like a bunch of irrational fools by association.  That weakens our ability to persuade middling, undecided voters.  (Read this to understand why our behavior in debate is important.)  Third, they may just snap, get a gun, and start shooting like the guy who shot the Republican congressmen at their baseball practice.  That does liberals absolutely no favors.  Instead, it gives conservatives talking points and helps them to falsely equivocate between us and them on the issue of political violence.  That false equivocation alienates middling voters whom we could otherwise persuade to support our vision of a good society.  None of these scenarios help promote the liberal vision.  In short, there is no benefit and an incredible amount of detriment to reading propaganda garbage from Bipartisan Report.  All it does is set up false expectations, inflame tempers, and destroy our ability as a progressive movement to accomplish anything.

There's a furnace set on high
And a yearning undefined
But it's time to turn the tide
It's social suicide

In Conclusion.

     We dug no deeper than a couple of days into Bipartisan Report’s postings to find the four articles we critiqued for this piece.  To select those articles, we merely looked at which headlines seemed inaccurate.  Those headlines also were some the most extremely phrased and probably the most likely to be read.  We only looked at 6 or 7 articles and were able to find the ones used here.  Any of them could have been used, though one was such thinly masked opinion that the author could try to weasel around and claim that they forgot to label it as an editorial.  These four provided the best means to highlight their propaganda.  That is just how loaded with propaganda Bipartisan Report is.

     If you are ready to step back off the ledge of propaganda and avoid the abyss of irrelevance that happens when one plagues their mind with poisonous lies, then you can start by no longer falling for Bipartisan Report’s fake-news click-bait propaganda posts.  If you care about promoting progressive values, then you can stand against the euthanizing of our collective intellect.  Here are some further steps that you can take to fight back against this pointless poisoning of our progressive principles that places a pall over our rationality.   

1) Patronize credible news organizations.  Many news organizations do incredible investigative journalism that exposes what our government does.  Those sources, especially print publications, face continued budget shortfalls.  Sites like Bipartisan Report not only steal the work of legitimate journalists, they misrepresent that work by propagandizing it.

2) Post the link to this article or the previous article (There’s More Than One Way for a Dog to Lie, Lying Dogs Will Put You to Sleep) or a meme from this article when you see someone post a fake news or propaganda lie from Bipartisan Report.
a) Remember to focus on the post and not the person posting.  Use this article to help create a conversation about the role of truth in our public discourse.  Refer to the articles Calming the Storm iv and Socrates Strives Forward v to help create a constructive dialogue.  (The art of Socratic questioning really helps to direct a useful exchange with people.)

3) If you are a Facebook group administrator, consider prohibiting this publication from your group or, preferably, use this article to create a dialogue about fake news when you see Bipartisan Report’s propaganda.  Also, consistently challenge garbage propaganda when you see it.

4) If you are a member of a Facebook group, request that group administrators prohibit propaganda from Bipartisan Report.  (Again, it is preferable to create a culture that self-regulates against propaganda, but we cannot always make that happen.)

5) If you like the Bipartisan Report page, unlike it and encourage others to do the same.  You can also report the page.
(Do NOT Block it! That will keep you from seeing their posts. Instead, you can report their posts.)


6) Report propaganda posts from Bipartisan Report.
a) Click on the downward facing arrow (in the red box).


b) Report post > I think it shouldn’t be on Facebook > It’s a fake news story.


7) Share this article.
8) Consider following this blog.

     The Greek philosopher Diogenes used to carry around a lamp in broad daylight. When asked why he replied, “I am searching for an honest man.”  Combatting fake news is one of the topic areas that we focus on at the Diogenetic Light as we search for truth.  We sincerely hope that this article helps you to spot propaganda and other varieties of fake news more easily in the future.  Thank you for reading.


We also write articles on political strategy, policy analysis, and satire. If you need some comic relief after reading this, you may want to check out this:

Antonin Scalia School of Law Offers Master’s in Women’s Law Program

Or this:



Dedicated to Dr. Greg Graffin for the inspiration he’s provided over the years.






Notes: 
1 Let’s set aside the fact that relinquish means to give up, and only the president can give up the president’s authority. Congress can take it away, but they cannot give it up for him.  Or, if they want to use "relinquish," then Congress could "relinquish him of power" but not just "relinquish Trump's power."
2 The School House Rock video is only to demonstrate their utter incomprehension of basic civics.
3 We do not expect the average citizen to remember all these details perfectly. Life is complex and people are busy with many things to think about. Any organization purporting to be a political news organization should have the minimal competence and integrity to not mischaracterize the basic processes of our system of government.
4 Consider how humiliated and reluctant you would be to engage in political debate if someone countered your argument by showing you were completely wrong on an issue so easily fact-checked as the process of a bill becoming law?

Sources: (Unless noted in the article, last check was July 1, 2017)
Posted by at No comments:

More Than One Way for a Dog to Lie



By Jeramee Sikroski
Editorial Assistance by Jason Missmer & Patty Powell Lazak

     Rational Americans fear the damage that Trump will do to our great nation and gravely desire him out of the White House.  The Diogenetic Light has also written several articles about fake and junk news, the damage that it does, and how fake news blocks our progressive goals.  Removing Trump is one of those goals that fake news impedes.  We used the term “junk news” in the last article because information does not have to be completely false in order to be mentally toxic and misleading, though some people do like to split that hair 1.  In this article, we will be blunt and honest with this broad category of material that covers both patently false and also misleading stories.  It is propaganda – biased or misleading information used to promote a particular cause or point of view.  As we will see, a source that puts out junk news will also put out fully fake news.  The consequence of either type of propaganda is a misinformed reader.

     Every media site will be biased in one way or another, but reputable and trustworthy sites are aware of their bias and try to limit it.  They also work to make sure that what they assert as fact is true 2.  One way to mislead people is by using misleading headlines, especially if it contains words that are emotionally loaded. There is also just flat out misreporting by using falsehoods in one’s report. This is especially egregious when a site does not correct poorly written stories. Here, we examine the damage done by the propaganda site Bipartisan Report. 

     We cannot have healthy bodies if we constantly breathe polluted air. Likewise, we need to create a cleaner atmosphere for our minds. Clearly seeing the consequences of fake news propaganda is a necessary first step.


Right now
Well it's finally time to face my fears
Gonna get the hell out of here
And create a fresher atmosphere
But the consequence is clear . . . 3,i


[Note: We would prefer to save the “propaganda” label for the end of the article. Upon examining the half dozen or so stories that we did for this article, though, we decided that it was too blatantly propagandistic to reserve judgment until the end.]
[Editor’s note: our practice is not to provide hyperlinks to propaganda articles in the story, but we do include hyperlinks in the citations below. We want our readers to be able to verify our credibility, but we also do not want to encourage people to actually read this garbage. This is the balance we struck.]

Articles in the Fake News Series:


Calls For Invocation Of 25th Amendment Hit W.H. Hard After Brzezinski Attack ii


There's a furnace set on high
And a yearning undefined
But it's time to turn the tide
It's social suicide

     The headline above tells us that there is a serious call for Trump’s removal through the 25th amendment.  (To understand why removal through the 25th amendment is not a helpful strategy click here.)  After all, the only way for the White House to be “hit hard” is if those impeachment calls are serious.  It sounds like the heat has definitely been turned up.  If we read the article, though, the only people making those calls are news people and some celebrities.  They include not one congressperson or senator, not even a Democrat 4.  Not a single person with the authority to actually bring a bill of impeachment in the House of Representatives is quoted in this story.  Without political leaders calling for Trump’s removal, which should have happened already (if the story were true), this is not a strong or serious call for invoking the 25th amendment.  The information asserted by the headline is decimated by what is actually reported.  Further, one cannot truthfully claim that the White House was “hit hard” unless there are members from Trump’s own party calling for his removal under the 25th amendment.  There simply is no serious call for Trump’s removal under the 25th amendment at this time.  This Bipartisan Report story was posted on June 29th.  If you need further proof, just check the day’s headlines to see if there has been a growing chorus calling for Trump’s removal by the time this article gets posted, which will be around 10 days after the Bipartisan Report piece.

     One may counter that the headline is not part of the article and should be discounted.  The purpose of a headline is to quickly convey what the article is about and grab the reader’s attention.  Writing misleading headlines violates the primary rules that decent journalists follow when writing headlines iii.  These misleading headlines convey false information and do so intentionally.  There are two elements to lying: conveying false information and an intent to deceive.  Misleading headlines do both, so let's be honest: Bipartisan Report lies 5, and it does so to intentionally inflame readers.  Being overly emotional weakens our ability to think accurately and to persuade undecided voters to support liberal causes and candidates.  (More on persuading undecided voters here and here.)  It is mentally toxic and socially destructive.

There's a furnace set on high
And a yearning undefined
But it's time to turn the tide
It's social suicide



Trump Caught In ‘Fake News’ Creation Scandal That He Will Never Recover From iv


     The fake news scandal in this article is about the fake Time magazine covers that Trump had hanging in his golf clubs for many years.  This headline is also highly charged and emotionally loaded, especially considering that the target audience is people who already loathe Trump.  But let’s take a look at how damaging this scandal is that “he will never recover from.”

Why would anyone get angry about this?
It's not the worst thing he's ever done.
It's not even the worst thing he's done this week.


     If it’s true that Trump will never recover from this, then it will be reflected in his approval poll numbers.  Let’s look at two different websites that compile and average the approval poll numbers together to get a composite score.  One is Real Clear Politics. The other is statistician Nate Silver’s 538.com website.  Both sites average multiple opinion polls together.  Staying true to their statistician ways, 538 further evaluates polls based measures of sound methodology and validity v.  From that evaluation, they give each poll a grade and then adjust the weight of the poll based on those measures of validity.  Real Clear Politics (RCP) generally gives Trump slightly better approval ratings than 538.

     Looking at the Trump’s approval from RCP composite poll average vi from June 27th, the day before the fake Time cover story broke, he was at a net negative -14.2% approval.  (RCP states it as +14.2% disapproval.)  As this article is being written, he stands at a net negative -14.4% approval (or +14.4% disapproval.)  If something is so bad that a politician can never recover from it, wouldn’t we expect more than a 0.2% drop in their approval polls?  [Update: by July 8th, Trump’s approval had improved to a net negative -12.3 % approval rating. What was that about never recovering?]

     Similarly, we can look at 538.com’s Trump approval poll composite average vii.  On June 27th, Trump had a -15.7% net negative approval rating.  On June 30th, he had a -14.7% net negative rating.  Did you notice that?  His approval rating actually went up an entire percentage point!  A few days later, on July 5th, he was at -15.1%, but it is still half a point better than the day before the story broke.  Instead of a permanent stain on his reputation, approval polls are showing no effect or possibly a slightly positive effect.  How could the headline be so wrong?  [Update: On July 8th, Trump’s approval had dipped back down to -15.9% net negative approval. This, however, is still not evidence that he would “never recover.”]




     Are those fake Time magazine covers petty, childish, and outrageously stupid lies? Absolutely.  Are they relevant to national policy in any way whatsoever?  Nope.  Are they even the most stupid or obnoxious thing he’s been caught doing this week?  Not by a long shot 6.  How long can Trump persevere in his determination to act like a toddler-bully?  More importantly, how long can the Bipartisan Report persevere in contaminating people’s minds with this psychological poison?  When will people on the left wake up and stop patronizing the “Bipartisan” poison peddler?  It is dishonest to deride the Republicans for being the party of stupid if we on the left also fall for fake news and propaganda.


Like you 7
Perseverance is a useless tool
Just a patron on a ship of fools
Feigning interest in the cast and crew
Why you've broken every single rule


ISIS Hacks Secure Government Website With Horrifying Message For Trump; Feds Paralyzed viii

     This article is about computer servers from state and local government websites being hacked by an ISIS-supporting group.  As is typical of Bipartisan Report’s stories, it does not provide links to any of their source material 8.  That makes it difficult to check the accuracy of their reporting.  Given what we have seen so far, we would guess that is intentional.

     Before we get into the meat of this article, we need to address the “Horrifying Message” in the hack.  Here’s what it said: "You will be held accountable Trump; You and all your people for every drop of blood flowing in Muslim countries."  That is a promise to hold Trump accountable, and, yes, ISIS does so through terrorism, but how is it horrifying?  Burning people alive is horrifying.  Given the truly horrifying things that ISIS has done to people, to call this “horrifying” is an insult to reason, to the victims of ISIS, and to dictionaries and logophiles 9 everywhere.  Now, onto the main course of this article.

     Bloomberg’s coverage of the hacks ix from June 26th states that several government websites in Ohio and one from a town in New York were hacked and defaced.  It has quotes from government officials in Ohio expressing defiance to this petty attack and also statements of actions government officials in Ohio have taken to fix the problem.  (There is also a screenshot of one government official crying like a cowardly chicken-little that the “heartland is under attack 10.”)  One thing it does not say is ANYTHING about the federal government.  Nada, zip, zilch, zero.  Where are they getting their information?  We'll return to that question in a moment.

     CNN’s coverage from June 26th x was a bit longer and also covered an identical hack in Howard County Maryland.  It further said that the FBI field office in Ohio would not comment at that time.  CNN’s updated with a new story a few days later when a Washington state government website was hacked. 11,xi  The story then stated that the investigation was being led by the FBI field office in San Fransisco.  The details of what the federal government is doing are not disclosed.

     The lack of disclosure may be frustrating for citizens who want to be informed.  Is that, however, the same as “paralysis”?  Of course not.  Not telling a person what you are doing is not the same as being unable to state what you're doing.  Any investigative agency is going to give very few details to the press while they conduct their investigations.  If they disclose the information they have, then the people being investigated will know exactly how to evade them.  This isn’t rocket science.  So, again, where do they get their information that causes them to claim that the “Feds Paralyzed”?



     Where they get their information is important because this is a news digest site.  As we discussed in the article on Redrum News, sites like this do not do their own journalism.  Instead, they read news stories and “digest” them, which means that they rewrite and condense the article.  Digests create value by getting rid of the extraneous, or unneeded, material in an article and letting the reader get what is most important from it.  Digests are also supposed to cite their sources, which Bipartisan Report does not do.  Is it dishonest to include “Feds Paralyzed” in a headline when it is not supported by anything written in the article and not supported by anything in other media sources which are their likely original sources?  Is Bipartisan Report just pushing propaganda?

     Let’s take a quick look at the value being offered by this news digesting service.  The ISIS hacking story in Bipartisan Report is 247 words.  The CNN story from the 26th is 450 words.  What value is added by the 200-word reduction?  Sources from reading software developers xii to Forbes magazine xiii give pretty consistent ranges that the average adult reads at between 200 – 300 words per minute, depending on the medium (digital or paper) and the type of reading involved.  Thus, the time saved is a minute or less.  In exchange for those seconds saved, the reader has also taken blatant falsehoods into their minds.  All in all, is it worth the time saved when you also have to deal with blatant lies?  What’s even worse is that is not even the most misleading of their recent headlines.  How much time will it take to remove these Elephants in the Mind?  Given their knack for misreporting the news, how much time is saved when one has to fact check every single story they publish?  How long will people choose to be simultaneously entertained and poisoned by Bipartisan Report’s fake propaganda stories?  

Shadows entertain the unwashed masses
Scholars explain their numb reactions
I don't even know if I can ever find truth
but I'm sure it won't come from following you


This article concludes with Lying Dogs Will Put You to Sleep.

Notes: 
1 We did this also because we, like our society, are evolving in how we grapple with this scourge.
2 We should not expect that every news organization will get the story right 100% of the time. Reputable media organizations, however, vet their sources to ensure accuracy and to make corrections when they are wrong. It is the fallacy of overgeneralization to say that if a couple stories are not completely correct (out of 100’s published every week) that the entire organization is “fake news.” Contrast that with the amount of completely un-true news being proffered by Bipartisan Report in this article.
3 From the poem and song, “Social Suicide” written by Dr. Greg Graffin of the punk band Bad Religion. Words courtesy of AZLyrics.
4 We believe that Democrats should refrain from openly calling for Trump’s impeachment right now. There are investigations occurring that will, hopefully, yield facts so damning that there is no way for Trump, Pence, or his team to survive politically. (Hopefully, that includes McConnell and Ryan too.) If Democrats call for impeachment prior to a strong case being laid out publicly, however, then they are going to be seen by evey Trump supporter and even some middling voters as the boy who cried wolf over and over. We need to have a case built and solid facts supporting it out in the public before cries for impeachment will be taken seriously by an overwhelming majority that is needed for impeachment and removal to be successful. We need to convince those folks in the middle first before there is any chance of getting enough support to remove him.
5 We admit this is quite a conclusion to make this early in the article, but we will back this conclusion up definitively as we continue.
6 Trump’s tweets insulting Mikka Brezinski, saying she was bleeding from a bad face lift, also happened during the time that this article was being written.
7“You” here should properly refer to the propagandists at the Bipartisan Report, and not to readers that have been suckered by their propaganda, in our opinion.
8 There is one link to a Facebook post of an Ohio governmental official who was overblowing the attack in an obvious attempt to rile up the Republican base. To that public official: yes this is a threat, but the sky isn’t falling. Pull up your big girl panties and stop acting like a child.
9 Logophile – a person who loves words.
Editor's apology: We know that we should veer away from such arcane words, but this one was too cool to edit out.
10The story states the only effect was to deface a front page of a website. Honestly, this “attack” has all the real-world effect of spraying graffiti on a building. It’s annoying but to call it an “attack on the heartland” is every bit as much propaganda as what Bipartisan Report publishes. The America I grew up in is much stronger than this and would never be harmed by some stupid graffiti. Conservative snowflakes like this need to stop whining.
11This CNN article was posted a day after Bipartisan Report’s piece was posted. One can argue that it is not fair to judge their reporting by information that came out later. We must reject that assertion. They have the ability to update their articles. The writing evinces no clear signs of delusional thinking, so we assume that they also have the ability to write honestly. They merely choose to write dishonest, click-bait propaganda.

Sources: (Last check on or around July 1, 2017, unless otherwise noted.)
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)