Yahoo News Comments are evil
- Thread starter Stalkingpanda14
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, not all, but you do have many people like Romney and Akin being voted into power by the citizens of the US. Which means either they've got lots of support, or their opponents can't be arsed voting. Both of these things seem abhorrent to most people I know.Stalkingpanda14 said:
By extension, of course, everyone else has to cringe and say "we don't all support them" about various politicians in their own countries.
Comments on news articles are usually various kinds of facepalm-inducing.
Take the constant pathetic wannabe class warfare on the Guardian, or the braindead, meaningless strings of words on Daily Mail articles. Or don't, because actually the only people who will ever comment on news articles are gonna be those motivated enough to sign up to the paper's website, who are often gonna be waaaaay too fanatical to the paper's ideals.
Take the constant pathetic wannabe class warfare on the Guardian, or the braindead, meaningless strings of words on Daily Mail articles. Or don't, because actually the only people who will ever comment on news articles are gonna be those motivated enough to sign up to the paper's website, who are often gonna be waaaaay too fanatical to the paper's ideals.
Well, first of all, US is just bigger and way more diverse than typical 10ish million monocultural european state.
Europe has more than a fair share of crazies, but they are usually divided by language barriers, hate eachother and thus can not act togather. Also, considering that it is Europe that has frequent urban risings, car burning and stone throwing to police ,I can not see how it manages to think of itself as a better place than US.
Second, Internet amplifies loud shouting fringes way more than common people.
As for politicans, I do not get how anyone claim US Republicans to be extreeme. Gay marriage is not recognised in most of European countries. US abortion laws are actually allow for larger abortion opportunity window than on average in EU. Anti-abortion movement exist perfectly fine in EU.
For immigration everything goes about what to do with illegal immigrants. Do european states deport illegal immigrants? As far as i know, yes they do.
Decreasing taxes and regulations is not extreme.
As for Romney, look no futher than France and Sarkozy.
Europe has more than a fair share of crazies, but they are usually divided by language barriers, hate eachother and thus can not act togather. Also, considering that it is Europe that has frequent urban risings, car burning and stone throwing to police ,I can not see how it manages to think of itself as a better place than US.
Second, Internet amplifies loud shouting fringes way more than common people.
As for politicans, I do not get how anyone claim US Republicans to be extreeme. Gay marriage is not recognised in most of European countries. US abortion laws are actually allow for larger abortion opportunity window than on average in EU. Anti-abortion movement exist perfectly fine in EU.
For immigration everything goes about what to do with illegal immigrants. Do european states deport illegal immigrants? As far as i know, yes they do.
Decreasing taxes and regulations is not extreme.
As for Romney, look no futher than France and Sarkozy.
Oh, you haven't lived until you've been to the MSN News comments section.
I read an article on there about the Taj Mahal falling into disrepair and how much it was going to cost. Then, in the comments, apropos of absolutely nothing, were at least three or four people all-capping 'And they expect the British to pay for it? We shouldn't be paying these people any money; we have our own problems without sending foreign aid to other countries.'
I've tidied up the language a bit, but it astounded me, because nowhere in the article did they mention any countries forking out money (I actually think the Indian government was looking for public/tourist donations for the repairs) but clearly someone had an axe to grind and any article mentioning a foreign country was as good a place to do it as any.
I read an article on there about the Taj Mahal falling into disrepair and how much it was going to cost. Then, in the comments, apropos of absolutely nothing, were at least three or four people all-capping 'And they expect the British to pay for it? We shouldn't be paying these people any money; we have our own problems without sending foreign aid to other countries.'
I've tidied up the language a bit, but it astounded me, because nowhere in the article did they mention any countries forking out money (I actually think the Indian government was looking for public/tourist donations for the repairs) but clearly someone had an axe to grind and any article mentioning a foreign country was as good a place to do it as any.
Yeah, it has always been that way, though. Way back in '99 and the early 2000's I used to be active on their news forums, because, well Yahoo and Netscape were the two major open news forums at the time, I remember after Sept 11th seeing comments saying: "Muslims are evil! Everyone is guilty by association! Nuke 'em and turn the desert into glass!" When I brought up the point that the majority of the world's Muslim population were peaceful and in fact did not live in the desert, I was called some very bad names I will not repeat.
In fact, I was accused of virtually everything in the book: Communist, Fascist, Neo-Fascist, Racist (for defending Muslims), and Anarchist (for saying it would be a bad idea to nuke Afghanistan.) If you ask me, it is just mostly people projecting their frustrations with their own ideologies onto anyone that they can.
In fact, I was accused of virtually everything in the book: Communist, Fascist, Neo-Fascist, Racist (for defending Muslims), and Anarchist (for saying it would be a bad idea to nuke Afghanistan.) If you ask me, it is just mostly people projecting their frustrations with their own ideologies onto anyone that they can.
That's more like the internet in general. We pretty much have anonymity from each other (even when someone threatens to find your IP address, or dear god, your mac address, how likely are they to go through with what they're threatening?), so we're open to say whatever we wish to.
I've seen idiocy on Escapist, on Yahoo! (every section from Answers to News), on Huffington Post, and a plethora of other sites.
It's not so much the "evil" of the site as it is just one of the consequences of anonymity.
I've seen idiocy on Escapist, on Yahoo! (every section from Answers to News), on Huffington Post, and a plethora of other sites.
It's not so much the "evil" of the site as it is just one of the consequences of anonymity.
What about all the hatred, theophobia, classism, racism, Heterophobia and any other of the myriad of short sighted bigotry that is perpetuated by the faux enlightened who assume that all those things listed in OP are wrong?
You might not like those points of view. You might well disagree with them, but to post such and frame it in such a way is doing exactly the same thing spoken out against, leaving it as a hypocritical position. Just because one set of perspectives is tolerated within a community and not frowned upon or punished does not make them right, and most certainly does not exempt them from the hatred, bigotry and intolerance they are. As the old saying goes, when you point a finger, remember youve got three pointing back at you.
You might not like those points of view. You might well disagree with them, but to post such and frame it in such a way is doing exactly the same thing spoken out against, leaving it as a hypocritical position. Just because one set of perspectives is tolerated within a community and not frowned upon or punished does not make them right, and most certainly does not exempt them from the hatred, bigotry and intolerance they are. As the old saying goes, when you point a finger, remember youve got three pointing back at you.
It's really nothing compared to our Holocaust apologists. They're not even rare at all: there's a reason the nazi party of our country got 31% during the last elections.
Good point, and you see a lot of that in those same comments sections as well. The Yahoo! comments section (and the comments sections of most news sites, sadly) are just a swamp of crazy in general. The subject of the article often determines whether the left-wing idiots or the right-wing idiots will dominate the comments.viranimus said:
For example, all the Yahoo articles during Christopher Dorner's recent rampage in southern California were full of lefty comment jerks calling him a hero.
As I said above there are stories about people paying groups (college students?) to swamp news story's comments sections early on. I often wondered if they do it not just to stomp opposing views but to shut down the kind of real cross-commenting that I used to see BEFORE the later part of the US presidential election.MeChaNiZ3D said:
I once saw someone in the MSN comments section trying to argue that homosexuality is transmitted by bacterial infection, and trying to say he'd read books saying so and stuff. It's hilariously backwards until you realise these people are roaming the streets.rob_simple said:
Yahoo answers is fun to just stroll through every now and then y'know, just to scoff at the stupidity.
Apparently no one was around when the monkey-in-chief was President of the US for eight years, a figurehead for Darth Vader taking over the world that caused 9/11 and let a hurricane destroy New Orleans because he didn't care about black people. Those were totally politically correct times in news and social media (Digg was a personally memorable cesspit).
Way to continue seeing the world through one-way transparent glass. It's called the Internet and there are no shortage of morons in any community.
Way to continue seeing the world through one-way transparent glass. It's called the Internet and there are no shortage of morons in any community.
