↪ Replying to @unknown
@Acuity_Design This poster ad, complete with the word choice and the font choice, really made me do a double-take. 😂
Posts in English
↪ Replying to @jakobper
@jakobper When it comes to the US, references to masturbation, profanity and drugs is often enough. There are apparently several scenes referencing masturbation, his artist neighbor walks around naked and the word ”fuck” is used.
The novel Flowers for Algernon had a profound impact on me when I read it in school, more than 30 years ago. It gave me important perspectives on ableism and prejudice. It nurtured my compassion. Made me cry.
I was sadly unaware of how many US schools have banned it.
Flowers for Algernon was number 43 on the American Library Association's list of the 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books of 1990-1999.
I found this upsetting. But it reminded me to talk about the book more. And make a note to re-read it.
↪ Replying to @unknown
@Augmentedrobot @JesperBylund I can truly recommend @TheEconomist. I also support @The_Corres.
↪ Replying to @Scott_Matter
@Scott_Matter Good call. This definitely works better. I'll have to reflect a bit on it.
Great conversation with Jesper about 'fact-based reporting' this morning. I'm glad he called it out. x.com/JesperBylund/s…
↪ Replying to @JesperBylund
@JesperBylund @snopes Agree about separating facts and morals. In that wording I meant that 'fact-based' _sounds_ like the moral path.
I like your reference to perspective-based. I'm closing in on connotations like honest, transparent and reflective. These make more sense.
@JesperBylund @snopes Also, this conversation reminds me why I fell in love with social media back in the day. The possibility for conversation around posts.
I feel like the conversations are drowning but I should be more intent on nurturing them.
↪ Replying to @JesperBylund
@JesperBylund @snopes Yes. And I really see what you mean. 'Fact-based reporting' is a term that sounds grounded in morality but lacks the nuances we've just discussed.
The question is, is there a better term for what I'm after, or is everything misinformation to a lesser or greater degree? 😁
↪ Replying to @JesperBylund
@JesperBylund @snopes Agree. This is a good thing. As an example, advertisers pulling out of FB for some reason:
* They are acting on moral values.
* They found a perfect time for "ethics-washing" because nobody is buying anything now and ads make no sense.
* Peer pressure.
These are the narratives.
@JesperBylund @snopes For me then, fact-based reporting would be based on the fact that advertisers are pulling out, but also be open to the many reasons this is happening. Or at least reporting company statements as narratives and not as truth. I see different journos do this better or worse.
@JesperBylund @snopes But yes, stating any of the narratives as fact would be wrong. As would be not following up on whether they actually do pull out.
↪ Replying to @JesperBylund
@JesperBylund When I say 'fact-based reporting' I am referring to reporting of events that actually happened, in contrast to purposely misleading info. This is why services like @snopes play a role.
I of course agree that everything is a narrative :)
”These tools give those controlling and co-ordinating millions or even billions of computers the monopolistic power to analyse or shape communities or countries, or even to change individual behaviour — without any individual’s data leaving their phone.” theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
First imagine how easy it would be for misinformation to spread without FB and Twitter.
Then imagine how easy it would be for fact-based reporting to spread without FB and Twitter.
It's of course not as easy as that, but I found it an interesting thought experiment.
My reflections around this always end up in reasonings around friction.
We need friction. Friction makes us think. Friction helps us question our choices, so that we may make better ones.
But right now many are drowning in passivity, egotism, and pleasure. In a sea of irrelevance.
Huxley likely had it more right than Orwell.
But no, we're not all the way there yet.
highexistence.com/amusing-oursel…
We digitized.
Everything became binary.
You're either wrong or you're right.
Wrong was immortalized in an immortal entity.
Everything became faster.
The immortal entity can make many more immoral choices per minute than any mortal.
Imagine immorality immortalized.
We digitized.
Vad irriterar dig mest när det gäller din mobila apparat (telefon och/eller platta)? Vad funkar dåligt, vad har du svårt att hitta och vad ser du att andra kämpar med?
Jag samlar på mig uttalade frustrationer för att på sikt göra små mikrokurser som hjälper människor att få en bättre relation till sin telefon.
↪ Replying to @hockew
@hockew @Terejs Förstår det! Det pratas för lite om rollen som biblioteken tagit för att både klara av, och reda ut bekymmer med, påtvingad digitalisering.
↪ Replying to @hockew
@hockew @Terejs Tack Håkan för att du tog dig tid att lyssna och återkoppla. Uppskattas!
↪ Replying to @Terejs
@Terejs Tack snälla för att du delar Terese. Jag har lagt hela talmanuset på min blogg så du vet:
axbom.blog/digin-expertfo…
I don't believe in soothsayers, but wow did this team of writers, producers and actors get it right.
Imagining a future attention-grabbing portable device, in 1947. x.com/Mangeon4/statu…
Last week I stumbled on one of my Twitter conversations from 4 years ago. I had misunderstood the OP's question. When called on it by someone else, I insisted my response was valid.
It wasn't.
It hurts when you see yourself being the douche you hate. Acknowledging is healing.
It wasn't a big thing - someone asking for recommendations and me misunderstanding the qualifying variables. And people likely just dropped it, seeing that I was confused in the moment. But that was my power in play... and unfair. I can feel my eyes rolling, then, and now 🙄.