So I was watching a bit of a discussion about the situation in Argentina and if their ancap president has been successful? Mostly it was libertarians calling it a victory because it makes them look good politically. It is also a style of doing things that is making its way into the US, as DOGE was inspired by the Argentine Admin.
While there are something that do seem to imply an economic recovery they did just get a huge bailout (not sure why a recovery that is doing so well needs one) as well as food insecurity, along with pensioners protesting.
Aside from this specific case that will be very polarizing; how do you try to discern in real time what is misleading?
That’s really hard. Unless you’re in a position where your opinion will have an influence (ie, you’re a judge, cop, or protestor who can take part in the event), you might as well wait a couple of days for more information to come out.
We’ve done ourselves a massive disservice by subjecting everything to constant, immediate analysis. Most of the time, we can afford to wait and learn more.
While I completely agree, I do have one counterpoint that the current US administration is employing to counter that tactic. Flood the zone with news story after news story of unrelated topics and it’s massively more difficult to remember all of them or follow up on them all
Here in Canada we’ve been trying to keep tabs on Trump’s tariff threats. At the start, our media was publishing headlines whenever posted about Canada/tariffs/etc. They seem to have given up on that (partially because Trump’s been distracted recently), but I think readers tuned out.
Instead we’re more focused on three current Canadian reaction, and the effects of whatever the current policies are. Tracking the day-to-day threats was almost information-free because Trump’s whims are so variable.
I think that strategy makes more sense: track the long-term story, without doing constant breaking news about something that’s likely to change soon.