Comment by saghm
3 days ago
Oh good, there have never been studies coordinated to come out to influence public opinion based on shoddy science before; just ask the tobacco industry
3 days ago
Oh good, there have never been studies coordinated to come out to influence public opinion based on shoddy science before; just ask the tobacco industry
You realize in this scenario you’re actually defending the tobacco companies, right?
Tobacco companies: “CIGARETTES ARE FINE!”
Society: “we should regulate that.”
Social media companies: “SOCIAL MEDIA IS FINE!”
Society: “we should regulate that”
You, apparently: “if the tobacco industry lied, it proves… social media… is being honest???? Or something???”
No, in this scenario I'm defending the idea that sometimes "a lot of studies" that come out "kinda at the same time" aren't necessarily due to robust science but can be pushed by a specific agenda. If you actually cared to include the specific factor that you cited as a rationale for regulation, you'd get this:
A bunch of studies: “CIGARETTES ARE FINE!”
Tobacco industry: "We don't need to regulate that"
A bunch of studies: "SOCIAL MEDIA IS DANGEROUS"
Government: "We need to regulate that"
Never mind that there's widespread scientific consensus on plenty of things that we're actively dropping the ball on (e.g. human causes of climate change) that nobody seems to feel the need to rush on as much as this.
I know what point you were trying to make, but I’m pointing out that your argument works against you much better than it works for you.
The last point you make is just lame whataboutism.
2 replies →