World Views

Please try to avoid religious or political subjects in this forum.
Amigoo
Family
Posts: 14195
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:32 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 0
Please type in these numbers:91294: 0
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: World Views

Post by Amigoo »

:scratch: Been nibblin' on this cheese recently? Are you being played like a fiddle?
It's best to identify who set the trap before enjoying more bites! :roll:


Q: Oxford Word of the Year 2025: rage bait
"Online content deliberately designed to elicit anger or outrage by being frustrating, provocative, or offensive."

Considering possible agendas, is this word (or related activity) used by individuals as well as businesses and governments?


(Perplexity) "Yes. The kind of activity described by 'rage bait' is used by individual creators, commercial actors,
and political or governmental actors, although the goals and tactics differ across these groups.

Many individual influencers and ordinary users post anger‑inducing content because it reliably drives comments, shares, and follower growth on engagement‑driven platforms. This can range from 'edge‑lord' humor and deliberately offensive jokes to slow, frustrating videos or inflammatory takes crafted mainly to provoke arguments (more than dialogue) rather than to inform.

Brands, news outlets, and content farms often use outrage‑oriented headlines or framing because anger increases time‑on‑site and ad revenue more than neutral or merely entertaining content. Media critics and therapists describe a broader 'rage economy', where commercial publishers systematically lean into divisive, emotionally charged stories or thumbnails to capture attention in a crowded market.

Political campaigns, parties, and their aligned media ecosystems routinely use outrage‑driven posts and narratives to mobilize supporters,
attack opponents, and keep their base engaged.

Scholars and commentators note that engagement‑optimized algorithms amplify morally outraging and polarizing political content, which creates strong incentives for political and, in some contexts, state‑linked actors to craft messaging that functions as rage bait, even if it is not always labeled that way.​"

(P) "Content that explains what rage bait is, why it works, and how to recognize or resist it aims at awareness and critical thinking rather than provocation.​ Even if the topic is unpleasant, the purpose is to give people language and tools to protect themselves, not to get them riled up."


:idea: Apparently, rage bait is common human behavior that "crosses the line"
when intent is mischievous or evil with intentional troublemaking.

Rod :)
Amigoo
Family
Posts: 14195
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:32 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 0
Please type in these numbers:91294: 0
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: World Views

Post by Amigoo »

:!: This headline alone symbolizes (and forecasts) a very troublesome 2026:
"US forces dramatically seize Russian-flagged oil tanker in the Atlantic" :o

:idea: First thought: In this era of greater international power balance,
countries can no longer achieve peace with "Might makes right!" :roll:


Rod :)
Amigoo
Family
Posts: 14195
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:32 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 0
Please type in these numbers:91294: 0
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: World Views

Post by Amigoo »

:lol: Humor in the news ...

Re: Austin Statesman (TX newspaper, 1/9/26) "President said he could be sending
$2,000 stimulus checks 'toward the end of the year' using revenue from tariffs."

:idea: Hopefully, before December 25 so we'll know who to thank for the gift. :roll:


Rod :)
Amigoo
Family
Posts: 14195
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:32 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 0
Please type in these numbers:91294: 0
Location: Dallas, TX

Re: World Views

Post by Amigoo »

:study: Re: https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough
"The tragic death of Renee Nicole Good"

A (dark) comedy of errors? :(

1. Renee's window was down with an officer talking to her and trying to open her door
while Renee was attempting to escape by turning right while driving forward. She had
to be looking to her forward right to anticipate oncoming traffic while being distracted
by the officer at her open window. The shooting officer was to her forward left,
the lesser visible distraction.

2. The shooting officer (forward left) probably perceived the initial movement
of the car intentionally in his direction (and he was close enough not to see
the direction of the car's wheels). This officer had previously been hit and
dragged by a car, thus was hyper-sensitive to this perceived threat.

:idea: First thought: It will be difficult to prove the blame of this incident,
but should now cause serious evaluation of "deadly force" policy.


Rod :)
Post Reply