What lessons haven’t we learned since 2016?

Understand the role you play as an individual in incentivizing and fueling disinformation and corrosive content. Don’t click the outrageous story link. Don’t rage-post. Leave content that is toxic alone. Yes, this includes the president’s tweets."

She certainly showed her political position rather quickly. Perhaps there is more substance to the entire article, but the above is all need to know about the writer.

ramage wrote: She certainly showed her political position rather quickly. Perhaps there is more substance to the entire article, but the above is all need to know about the writer.

I challenge you to read that article. If you do, read it with an open mind.

Unfortunately,we have a king that is just as polarizing as Hillary.....NO middle ground. Love the idol OR hate the horror a human being....I guess.

I love this false belief that before Trump, politics was a Golden Age. No one ever made up stories about their opponents or whipped up followers into a frenzy. Politics in America has always been scummy and rambunctious.
The current Democrat candidate for President, Joe Biden, lied to African American voters when Mitt was running, claiming that if Romney was elected, they would be locked up in chains. The Leftist media claimed if Trump became President, he would get us involved in more wars. It didn't happen. American politics has always been more about passion than facts, but the smart voter has to see through the empty promises and lies. One of the reasons I like the idea of making voting tougher. We want educated voters, not the dopes who never read a news story and only vote in presidential years.

I also challenge you, Fred, to read the article. It talks about Trump's instinctive ability to tap into the rage many people feel and how we, as Americans, need to stop feeding the rage machine.

The article suggests that we need to stop the "rage" by not retweeting angry post but it also, at the same time throws a rage grenade right into the middle of anyone who supports Trump. It is the least self aware article I've read recently.

I accepted your challenge, read the article, and what did I find:

"In many ways, President Trump is the living embodiment of a modern dilemma, where pointing out that something is false and dangerous can also end up giving more oxygen to the fire. He seems to know instinctively what many reports have confirmed: that rage is the most powerful emotion on the internet.

His path to the White House was paved with billions of dollars of “earned media” — free coverage gained by giving increasingly incendiary rally speeches that drove every news cycle. The president himself tracks this closely. Obsessed with his own twitter engagement rates, he tests and revises purposefully inflammatory content to “improve his numbers” as needed, wanting to be the headline – the “winner” – of each day’s episode of the worst reality show in history. It’s the ultimate race to the bottom of our public discourse.

Many of us don’t follow the President on twitter, but his false, angry, and misleading tweets litter our timelines anyway as journalists and other influential accounts retweet him, often to denounce his statements. The same is true for videos of the president saying things that are 100 percent false or fabricated at his rallies (or these days, during his daily coronavirus briefings). Since Trump’s election, reporters and analysts have continued to struggle with this issue of how to address his lies and outrageous statements without needlessly amplifying them in their reporting."

No other politician or person is used as an example of stirring up rage. Really? This is what you find meaningful?

As is pointed out in her bio, she writes for the WaPo, Wired, etc. Appears on MSNBC, CNN.

Article is from Stand Up Republic, a group founded by a CIA officer and his lackey. It is more propaganda and, as usual, people are led right into the mind f***.

A few quick examples of hypocrisy...: