Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It isn’t a political problem, it’s a messaging problem. The fact we allow a large group of folks to outright lie about the problem on public airwaves results in the “division”. I’m all for freedom of speech, but when public figures are knowingly telling lies, whoever is broadcasting it should be FORCED to follow it up with the facts of the situation.

In other words, at least in the US, the fairness doctrine needs to be re-instated. The number of things this country has killed off “because it worked so well we don’t need it any more” is mind numbing.



Many of the countries we are discussing have much less significant influence of money on media and still - raising prices is very unpopular.

The left needs to come to terms with the fact that sometimes the things they are proposing are unpopular independent of some “dark money influence scheme.”


> Many of the countries we are discussing have much less significant influence of money on media

In absolute terms you are correct, but in relative? Is there really a country where the media isn't strongly influenced by the rich and powerful of said country and the world?


This is a theory of the world that seems pretty non-falsifiable. "The real, uninfluenced people agree with my policy priorities and the only reason they don't is due to money at play." Any example of people disagreeing just proves that there is monetary influence that we haven't yet identified.

But I actually think it is somewhat falsifiable. Most people, when polled, are in favor of solving climate change - especially in nordic countries. But when you poll people with imposed costs, ie. $10/mo extra to completely solve climate change - the vast majority are opposed. [0]

This seems like people organically responding negatively to costs, not being brainwashed by media - otherwise they wouldn't support solving it in the first place.

[0]: https://www.cato.org/blog/68-americans-wouldnt-pay-10-month-...


I didn't state a theory, I wrote a simple counter-argument to your position. If you're correct, you should be able to produce evidence that proves your position correct. I don't think you are correct, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.


the original commentator indicated that the reason people are against it is due to the influence of money in politics.

i feel like i provided evidence against that theory, ball is not in my court




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: