- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How corporate lobbyists use the internet to destroy democracy
Posted on 3/25/14 at 7:39 am
Posted on 3/25/14 at 7:39 am
8
Posted on 3/25/14 at 7:41 am to Draconian Sanctions
Author calls lobbyists "the worst people in the world" in the first paragraph. 
Eta: and could you please explain how the article supports your assertion in the op?
Do you agree with the authors assertion that fracking will pump poisonous water under a towns homes?
Eta: and could you please explain how the article supports your assertion in the op?
Do you agree with the authors assertion that fracking will pump poisonous water under a towns homes?
This post was edited on 3/25/14 at 7:44 am
Posted on 3/25/14 at 7:46 am to BBONDS25
i don't now enough about fracking to have an opinion on that. and furthermore it really has no bearing on the article as a whole.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 7:59 am to Draconian Sanctions
Good, I hate democracies. It's a good thing we are a representative republic!
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:04 am to Draconian Sanctions
Why should businesses be prevented from seeking to advance their causes just like any other person, or group of persons? The author dislikes the fact that his opponents are adopting the same tactics as his side uses. I think the author is a whiny bitch who doesn't like fair fights. He demonizes his opponents which is exactly what he accuses his opponents of attempting to do.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:06 am to BBONDS25
quote:
lobbyists "the worst people in the world"
if there were no susceptible, corrupt politicians, then these lobbyists wouldn't exist.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:06 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
The author dislikes the fact that his opponents are adopting the same tactics as his side uses
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:17 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
furthermore it really has no bearing on the article as a whole.
quote:
use the internet to destroy democracy
You progs are pathetic. Anything to squelch speech, thought, data, research, or ideas you dont agree with. How is that "democratic" you fricking tart.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:30 am to CptBengal
Will never understand why a person wouldn't put the vast majority of the blame for bribe-taking/financial influence on the heads of those accepting the bribe.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:31 am to CptBengal
quote:
Westbourne also led the campaign to defend HS2, a propsed high-speed rail line, from English communities who'd rather there weren't trains roaring past their homes at 125 MPH.
oh the ironing
quote:
Westbourne engages in aggressive rebuttal campaigns, which involves creating a feeling among opponents that everything they say will be picked apart.
i mean i know i'm crazy and all, but this sounds like the exact type of scrutiny i want of those involved in government
quote:
Lobbying firms are in the search engine optimization business too. They will create phony blogs for clients that are made to appear as if they've been created by outsiders. Press releases that no journalist will ever see are pumped out just so there’s something else to read on Google when a client faces hostility. “Online, you should constantly be coming up with new content that can help push negative information down,” a lobbyist from global agency Burson-Marsteller advised colleagues in 2013, during a debate on winning the “kitchen-table conversation.”
as a novice in the SEO market, this is pretty much SOP for every industry for every marketing online
quote:
What has changed is the sophistication of the technology, which has given PR firms and others a host of new tactics, like fake blogs and online "front" groups.
so the online protestors are mad that industry is using the same technology, but they're calling the technology bad now?
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:34 am to Stingray
quote:
Will never understand why a person wouldn't put the vast majority of the blame for bribe-taking/financial influence on the heads of those accepting the bribe.
this isn't even about that
this is about one group using an avenue and then essentially claiming it, and complaining when its opponents use the same avenue to rebut. it's hypocrisy. this reminds me of the gay rights movement, who initially pushed for referendums to legalize gay marriage...and then complained when they lost b/c opponents emerged who rallied the OTHER side.
this goes back to the cognitive bias that x-method should only be allowed for the "good" cause. which cause is "good" will obviously be defined by each group trying to use x-method
Posted on 3/25/14 at 8:34 am to Draconian Sanctions
This is a joke right DS?
Surely you have no problem with organizations promoting their agenda.
Where is the article on Organizing for America's sneaky plan to destroy democracy by Internet campaign? Want to try moveon.org? What about their agenda promotion?
Good grief. We've jumped the shark when free speech=destroying democracy.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:08 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
In the old days, these champions of murderous dictators and big polluters were able to talk politicians round to their way of thinking over boozy lunches in opulent private members' clubs. Nowadays, they're forced to do the devil's work in the harsh glow of a laptop screen rather than the more persuasive atmospheres created by soothing candlelight and expensive whiskey.
How, exactly, is this a bad thing?
Honestly could not get to the end of the article because it didn't really seem to be making a coherent point.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:11 am to BigJim
Internet 1
Draconian 0
Draconian 0
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:13 am to Taxing Authority
It is not the most well written article, but it does get at the problem with these organized propaganda machines representing corporate or special interests. Their interests are often in direct conflict with the interest of the citizenry.
This post was edited on 3/25/14 at 9:14 am
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:14 am to BigJim
quote:
Honestly could not get to the end of the article because it didn't really seem to be making a coherent point.
i can make it coherent by adding a filter
imagine yourself fighting for a particular cause, and you subjectively value that position over others (let's call it the "right choice"). now imagine you find a new avenue to push the "right choice", and you feel that the "bad choice" you're fighting has its traditional avenues, and you have this new one for the "right choice".
you're going to throw a temper tantrum when the "bad choice" starts to use your avenue, and since you have already made the subjective valuation, then your manipulation of the avenue is genuine, good, and something that should be celebrated. on the flip side, the "bad choice" using it is terrible, bad-natured, and disingenuous.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:16 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
but it does get at the problem with these organized propaganda machines representing corporate or special interests.
it's just basically SEO, which EVERYONE uses online. i bet your firm uses it. are they evil?
quote:
Their interests are often in direct conflict with the interest of the citizenry.
thread, this is what i mean by the subjective evaluation of superiority or inferiority
in this case, inferiority
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:19 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:Ya think?
It is not the most well written article,
quote:bullshite. Who the f*ck are you to judge what's in a citizens best interest? You're every bit as judgmental as a fundamentalist Christian.
Their interests are often in direct conflict with the interest of the citizenry.
That isn't for you to judge. I'd say that 100% of OFA and moveon.org are "in direct conflict wit the interest of the citizenry." But it's well within their rights to promote it.
That's the beauty of free speech. People get to say things that others may not agree with. Perhaps you find that detestable. But I do not.
This post was edited on 3/25/14 at 9:26 am
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:20 am to Poodlebrain
quote:Standard leftist dogma. They're not big fans of having opposition.
The author dislikes the fact that his opponents are adopting the same tactics as his side uses
quote:Yep.
I think the author is a whiny bitch who doesn't like fair fight
quote:And a ding ding ding.
He demonizes his opponents which is exactly what he accuses his opponents of attempting to do.
Posted on 3/25/14 at 9:21 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
It is not the most well written article, but it does get at the problem with these organized propaganda machines representing corporate or special interests. Their interests are often in direct conflict with the interest of the citizenry.
Well, what would you prefer:
A. Politicians completely ignorant about science, technology, industry, and the environment making laws regulating them without having even the slightest inclination about the ramifications of those laws.
OR
B. Lobbyists from every viewpoint are allowed to discuss with lawmakers to inform them and persuade them to support the lobbyist's stance on a given issue.
If you would like to go about policing fact from fiction, that is one thing entirely. However, often the truth is up for interpretation and lies between fact or fiction. If you want government regulating this information, do you really trust them to do so without massive corruption, waste, and fraud?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News