Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'viral'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Freedomain Topics
    • General Messages
    • Current Events
    • Libertarianism, Anarchism and Economics
    • Atheism and Religion
    • Philosophy
    • Self Knowledge
    • Peaceful Parenting
    • Men's Issues, Feminism and Gender
    • Education
    • Science & Technology
    • Reviews & Recommendations
    • Miscellaneous
  • Freedomain Media Content
    • New Freedomain Content and Updates
    • General Feedback
    • Freedomain Show Lists
    • Technical Issues
  • Freedomain Listener Corner
    • Introduce Yourself!
    • Meet 'n Greet!
    • Listener Projects
    • Community Reference Information

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


AIM


Gallery URL


Blog URL


Location


Interests


Occupation

Found 2 results

  1. Hi thinkers and alike, What are the MORAL pros and cons when it comes to 'clickbait'? If some proportions are to be provably moral, what are good approximations/guidelines that could be put forward? Are there any important long term consequences? (due to the argument of the thread, was the title chosen as such, all for the intended constructive purpose of pure demonstration itself) - - - - I have done a search on the forum but haven't found any thread with this topic. - - - - Here's a Wikipedia definition Here's a(n) Urban dictionary definition Here's what Merriam-Webster 'says' - - - - my stance: I have no problem with it, unless I forgot to put on my 'thinking cap'. Though definitely have been always drawn to content where the claim (even if hyperbolic) have been greatly justified throughout the content and falls after overall consideration into the 'soft-clickbait' category. - - - - other, similar terms: 'link bait' 'sensational titles' 'SEO-d titles' (churnalism?) ... - - - - Have a good one, Barnsley
  2. It appears in this video that Matt Damon is an anarchist and that he encourages civil disobedience: http://www.upworthy.com/one-of-matt-damons-finest-performances-was-never-in-theaters Perhaps Stefan should invite him on the show or create an open reply like he did with Russel Brand. I realised later that Matt Damon is in fact performing / reading a speech of Howard Zinn from 1970. However, it kinda looks as if he actually means it. And there are so many of these upworthy videos going viral these days that it makes sense to respond to them - most of the upworthy videos have a statist / leftie agenda. Which reminds me that particularly this upworthy video is extremely popular and has gone very viral: http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2 It is about the distribution of wealth. The typical person that posts it on facebook is a socialist or raving statist and the conclusion is always (at least amongst Europeans): USA is a libertarian hell-hole - see how libertarianism leads to inequality - we need more laws, regulation and taxation. I think it is extremely important to explain to people that this insane inequality is the RESULT of statism, not an excuse for it!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.