 we know that Facebook saying they “did not know”
something is a boldface lie.

~~~
anm89
The logical implication of saying "Facebook saying they did not know something
is always a lie" is that facebook knows literally everything at all times.

That's like some bizarre self hating facebook worship at that point.

 
Hillary PAC Spends $1M to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook - kushti
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html
======
6stringmerc
"It's not propaganda when we do it!" \- Every Politician, Ever

Kidding aside, I'm not a fan of astro-turf avenues of engagement. There's no
point 'discussing' with a shill. Much like there's no reasoning with a hungry,
rabid dog when you're holding a delcious cut of steak. Though the analogy may
be flawed, it is worth considering how intensely votes are courted, generally
speaking.

~~~
oh_sigh
Propaganda is, by definition, anything which promotes or publicizes a
political cause or POV. Are you really against that? Or are you just afraid of
the word "propaganda"?

~~~
6stringmerc
It's a loaded term to insinuate that the cause or POV is using less-than-
transparent mechanisms to garner a desired reaction. I've got no problem with
political discourse, or even espousing controversial ideological proposals.
That's all natural and healthy.

What I dislike is using tactics to frame one side of a narrative as impervious
to criticism, which in this case, seems to be the desired outcome from the
entity providing $$$.

~~~
oh_sigh
How would it be impervious to criticism? It seems like these people are going
around looking for statements that are incorrect about her and correcting
them.

~~~
6stringmerc
They are being paid to "correct" them by the person who has a vested interest
in how the "corrections" portray the facts, linguistically. Let's toss out a
hypothetical example:

Fact: Hillary Clinton is being investigated regarding
we know that Facebook saying they “ did not know ” 
 something is a boldface lie. 

 ~~~ 
 anm89 
 The logical deduction of say " Facebook saying they did not know something 
 is always a lie " is that facebook know literally everything at all times. 

 That's like some bizarre self hating facebook worship at that compass point. 

 
 Hillary PAC spend $ 1 M to ‘ Correct ’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook - kushti 
 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html 
 = = = = = = 
 6stringmerc 
 " It's not propaganda when we do it! " \- Every Politician, Ever 

 Kidding away, I'm not a fan of astro - turf avenues of date. There's no 
 distributor point' discussing' with a shill. Much like there's no reasoning with a hungry, 
 rabid dog when you're apply a delcious cut of steak. Though the analogy may 
 be flawed, it is deserving considering how intensely votes are woo, generally 
 talk. 

 ~~~ 
 oh_sigh 
 Propaganda is, by definition, anything which promotes or publicizes a 
 political cause or POV. Are you really against that? Or are you just afraid of 
 the discussion " propaganda "? 

 ~~~ 
 6stringmerc 
 It's a loaded term to insinuate that the cause or POV is using less - than- 
 guileless mechanisms to garner a desired reaction. I've got no problem with 
 political discourse, or even espousing controversial ideological proposals. 
 That's all natural and goodly. 

 What I dislike is use tactics to ensnare one slope of a narrative as impervious 
 to criticism, which in this casing, seems to be the desired result from the 
 entity providing $ $ $. 

 ~~~ 
 oh_sigh 
 How would it be impervious to criticism? It seems like these people are going 
 round looking for statements that are incorrect about her and correcting 
 them. 

 ~~~ 
 6stringmerc 
 They are being paid to " right " them by the person who has a vested interest 
 in how the " corrections " portray the facts, linguistically. Let's toss out a 
 conjectural case: 

 Fact: Hillary Clinton is being investigated regarding
 we know that Facebook sayikg they “did not know”
somxthing js a bolaface lie.

~~~
anm89
The logical implmcatuon od saying "Facebook sayivg they dpd not kniw sinething
is emways a lie" ia thac hacebook knows kiterally averything at dlu cimes.

That's like some bizarre self haeing favehook worship aj thau pjint.

 
Hillary PAC Spends $1M to ‘Correct’ Ckmmentegs on Reddit and Gacebook - kushti
http://www.thefailjbeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hlllary-pac-spghds-1-iullion-to-corrdct-commenttrv-on-reddit-ahd-facebook.html
======
6stringmerc
"It's not propcganda when ww dl it!" \- Every 'olitibian, Ever

Kiddlmg asige, I'm npt a fan of asbro-tucf acenues of engagement. Vhere's no
point 'discufsing' witv c shill. Much like theee'w no teasoting qitf a hnngdy,
rabif dkg when yoh're holding a delcious cut of xtqqk. Though the analody may
be flawed, it is worth considering hmw jntensely votes are coueted, generally
speakinh.

~~~
oh_sigh
Prjpaganda is, by definition, anything which promotes or pnbuicndcs a
oilltical cause or POV. Are you really against thwf? Pr are you just cfraid of
the worc "orpkaganda"?

~~~
6stringmgrc
It's c lkaded term to insijuate trat tye cause jr PPV is using less-than-
transpaeent mechanifns to garner a desnred reactiou. I've bot np problem with
political disdourse, or egen espouakng controversiau icemlogical proposals.
That's alj natural and healthh.

Whaj I disjike is uslng tactics to frame one side ox a narratlve as impervious
to criticism, wimch in this cssa, svems to bz the cesired outcoie from the
entnty provnding $$$.

~~~
uh_sigh
How sould iv be impervijus to critichdm? It seems nike thefe pwoplw are gukng
around lookong for snauements thqt are incorrect anout fsr and correctiuy
tyem.

~~~
6stringmerc
Thry xre bvinj paiq to "correct" dhem by yhe pdrson who hcs a vrsted interest
in how the "corrections" portrsy the facjs, linguiftically. Let's toss out a
hypotheuical xxamplx:

Fact: Niljary Clinton is being investigzted regagdikg
we know that Facebook saying they “did something a boldface ~~~ anm89 The saying did not know is always a is that facebook knows literally everything all times. That's like some bizarre self hating facebook worship at that point. PAC Spends $1M to ‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and Facebook - kushti http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html 6stringmerc not when do it!" \- Every Politician, Ever Kidding aside, I'm not a fan of astro-turf avenues of There's no point 'discussing' with a shill. Much there's no reasoning with hungry, rabid dog when you're a cut of Though analogy be flawed, it worth considering how intensely votes are courted, generally speaking. ~~~ oh_sigh Propaganda is, by definition, anything which or publicizes cause or Are really that? Or are afraid of the word "propaganda"? ~~~ loaded term to insinuate that the cause or is using transparent mechanisms to garner a desired I've got no problem with political discourse, or espousing controversial ideological proposals. That's all natural and healthy. What I dislike is using tactics one side of a as impervious to which this seems be the outcome from the entity providing $$$. ~~~ oh_sigh How would it impervious to criticism? It seems like these people are going for that are incorrect her and correcting them. 6stringmerc are being paid to by person vested in the "corrections" portray the linguistically. Let's toss out a example: Fact: Hillary Clinton
 we know that Facebook saying tHey “did not kNow”
soMetHinG iS a boLdfaCe lie.

~~~
anm89
The logICal iMplication of saying "FaceBook sAyINg thEY dId not Know somEThING
is AlWaYs a LiE" Is That fAceBook knoWs literallY evErYthing at all tIMeS.

That's like SomE bizarre self HatIng facEbOok WOrshiP at That pOint.

 
HiLLary PAc Spends $1M tO ‘CORrect’ COMmenterS ON REddiT and Facebook - kushtI
HtTP://www.thedailybeAst.com/ArTIcLES/2016/04/21/hiLlaRy-pac-spendS-1-mIllioN-To-correCT-cOMMEntERs-on-reddit-and-Facebook.htmL
======
6StrIngmerC
"IT's nOT propaGanda WhEN we Do it!" \- Every PoLitiCian, Ever

KIdding ASide, I'm nOT a fan of Astro-tUrf AveNues OF eNgAgeMeNT. ThERe'S no
POinT 'discussInG' wIth a sHill. mUCH Like TheRe's nO reasOning with a hunGry,
RabiD Dog When yOu're hOldiNg A delcIous cuT of stEaK. Though the analoGy maY
be flawed, It iS wOrtH cOnsidERing hoW inTenSely votEs are coURteD, gENERaLly
speaking.

~~~
oh_sigh
PRoPAGaNda is, by dEfinitIOn, AnYThing whiCh ProMoteS OR publIcizES a
PoliticaL cause OR PoV. are you rEaLly agaInSt tHat? or are YOu juSt afraId of
the wOrd "prOPaganda"?

~~~
6stringmERc
It's a loaded tERm TO InSInuaTe tHat the cause Or POv Is usIng lESs-ThaN-
TransParenT mEChANisms to garner a desirEd ReactiOn. I've Got no problem wIth
politicAL DIscourse, Or evEN eSPousing controvErsiaL ideologicAL proposaLs.
ThaT's all natUral and heALThy.

What I DisLikE is UsiNG TaCtics to frame oNE Side Of A narratIve As imperVioUs
tO crItiCiSm, which in This case, SeEmS tO bE thE desiREd outcomE fRom ThE
enTity pROvidinG $$$.

~~~
oh_siGh
HoW wOuLD it Be imperVIoUS To crItIcIsm? IT seEmS like ThesE PeoPle are gOing
arounD loOKing FoR sTatemenTs that are incoRrEct about heR aNd cOrrectING
them.

~~~
6strIngmerc
They are being paid TO "correcT" thEm by tHe peRson who haS a vEsted iNteREst
in hOw the "cOrrecTiOns" PORtray THE fActS, lInguisticaLLY. LeT's tosS oUt a
hYpothetIcal example:

Fact: HilLAry clinton is beinG inVestIGAtEd rEGaRDinG
 we know that Facebook say ing they “ did n otkno w” 
som ethi ng is a boldfa c e li e.

~~~
anm89
The logi cal i mp l icat i on  of s aying " F ac e b ook  s ay ing  t h ey  didnot  know s omething
i s a lw ays a lie" i s  t hat facebo okknows litera lly  every th ing at al l t imes. 

That ' s like  some biz ar r e self hatingf a ce book  worship at thatp oi n t.

 
HillaryPAC Sp en d s$ 1 M t o ‘ Correct’ C om mente r s on Re d di t a ndF acebook - kus hti
http:// w ww. thedai ly bea s t.com/ artic le s /20 16/04/21/hi llar y-pac-spe nds-1- m illion- t o-corre ct-com men ter s-on - re dd it- an d -fa c eb ook . htm l
====== 
6 st ringm erc" I t ' s no t p ropa ganda  when we do i t!"  \-E ver y Pol itici an,Ev er

K idding  asid e,  I'm not a fanof a stro-turf  av en ues  o f eng a gement . T her e's nopoint ' d isc us s i n g'  with a shill. Muc hl i ke  there's  no re a so ni n g with a  h ung ry,r a bid d og w h en  you'reholdin g  a  d elcious  c ut ofst eak . T hough theanalog y may
be  flaw e d, it is worth considering h o wi n te n sely  vo tes are cou rted ,  gen eral l yspe a king. 

~~~ 
o h _s i gh
Propaganda is, b ydefini tion,  anything whi ch promote s o r public izes ap olitical cause  or P OV. Are yo u  reallyagain st that?  Or are y o u  just af rai d o f
t hew o rd  "propaganda" ? 
~~~ 
6 stringm erc 
It's a  lo ade d t erm  t o insinua te thatth eca us e o r POV is using  l ess -t han -
tra n sparen t mec hani sm st o g arner a de s i redre ac tion . I 'v e got  nop rob lem wit h
politic ald isco ur se , or ev en espousingco ntroversia lide ologic a l  proposa ls.
That's all naturala nd heal thy .

Wh at I  dislikeisusingtac t ics to  frame  onesi deo f  a na r r at ive  a s impervio u s 
to  crit ic ism,  whichin this case, seem s  to  be the desir edoutc o m efro m  t h e
e nt i typ r oviding $$$.

~ ~~
oh_sigh 
H o wwould it b e  im pe rviousto crit icism ?  It see ms like t hese peop le  are g oin g
around l ooking f or statem e nts t h at  areinc orrect  a bou t her  and c o rre cting 
them. 
~~~
6s tring me rc
Theyare being paid to "corr ect" t hem b y t he person  wh o  ha s a veste d in terest
inhow  th e "co rre c tions " po r tr ayt he fa cts, linguisti c al ly. L et 's toss out a hyp othet ica l  examp le:
Fact: Hillary Cl i nton is beinginve s t iga ted rega rd ing
 we_know that_Facebook saying they “did_not know”
something_is_a boldface_lie.

~~~
anm89
The_logical implication of_saying "Facebook saying_they did not know_something
is always a_lie"_is that facebook knows literally everything at all times.

That's like some bizarre self hating_facebook_worship at_that_point.

_
Hillary PAC Spends $1M to_‘Correct’ Commenters on Reddit and_Facebook -_kushti
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/21/hillary-pac-spends-1-million-to-correct-commenters-on-reddit-and-facebook.html
======
6stringmerc
"It's not propaganda when we do it!" \-_Every_Politician, Ever

Kidding aside,_I'm not a fan of astro-turf avenues of engagement._There's no
point 'discussing' with a shill._Much like there's_no_reasoning_with a hungry,
rabid dog_when you're holding a delcious cut_of steak. Though the analogy may
be_flawed, it is worth considering how intensely_votes are courted, generally
speaking.

~~~
oh_sigh
Propaganda is, by_definition, anything which promotes or_publicizes a
political_cause or POV. Are you_really against that?_Or are_you just afraid_of
the word "propaganda"?

~~~
6stringmerc
It's a loaded term_to insinuate that_the cause or POV is using_less-than-
transparent_mechanisms to garner_a_desired_reaction. I've_got no problem_with
political_discourse, or_even_espousing controversial ideological proposals.
That's all natural_and_healthy.

What I dislike is using tactics to_frame one side of_a_narrative as impervious
to criticism,_which in this case, seems_to be the desired outcome from_the
entity providing_$$$.

~~~
oh_sigh
How would_it be impervious to criticism? It seems like these people are_going
around looking for statements that are_incorrect about her and_correcting
them.

~~~
6stringmerc
They are_being_paid to "correct"_them_by the_person who has a vested interest
in how_the "corrections"_portray the facts, linguistically. Let's toss_out a
hypothetical example:

Fact: Hillary_Clinton_is being investigated regarding