this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
737 points (97.9% liked)

News

23627 readers
2449 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 87 points 4 days ago (3 children)
[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 59 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

There's a teensy bit of data massaging to make the approval rating appear lower... in my opinion of course.

The respondents were asked to rank "acceptability of the killers actions" on a scale of 1 to 5.

Assumin'the average "young voter" views gunning strangers down as:

[1.very unfavorable]

(You would, if asked about murder, say it was bad As a rule. right? I would too. Ya know, unless it was justified.)

Looking at it that way, the same data looks a lot different suddenly.

33% young voters still think the killer is completely unjustified.

7% think there was some justification

19% are undecided if the CEO deserved to die for what he did

24% think the killer was mostly justified... But have reservations

17% believe he was 100% in the right

I got a little free with the interpretations but you get the idea, You could decide to frame the data this way too. there's a saying: statistics don't lie but statisticians do. Here's my 100% true alternate title using the data but presented with the story I want to tell:

67% of Young Voters at Least Partly Approve of Killers Actions

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 29 points 4 days ago

Selective selection of selected data by billionaire controlled media still can't get below 41%

It's awesome how willfully they exclude or manipulate in attempt to soften the information.

[–] pretzelz@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

"Don't completely disapprove" might be better phrasing

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah that's the shocking point for me

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm of two minds about it. Half the time, I want to build a statue of Luigi

The other half of the time, I'm feeling the Tolkien quote, "many that live deserve death, and many that die deserve life. Will you give it to them?"

In other words, at no point do I feel that Brian Robert Thompson didn't objectively deserve to die. He is objectively doing more good for the world as worm food than he did as a living man. My only question is on the ethics of anyone actually killing him. On one hand, no one should have a right to make that call on their own. On the other, it's not like he was ever going to face justice any other way.

I wonder if this dilemma is reflected in this poll. You can believe that killing the CEO was unacceptable, while also believing he absolutely deserved it.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Well said.

I don't usually wish cancer on people, but if I had to choose, I'd probably have wanted him to go this way than by vigilante justice.

[–] tamal3@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

It has begun a very interesting national conversation, though...

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago

I've been trying to tell you guys this is an echo chamber on the issue.