@nicholas @LostInCalifornia

> It's just so jarring from spinsters, you know? Like, they saw how the corporate press, big business, academia, and cultural institutions work in lock-step to push a narrative and call any dissenting voices bigots and nazis -on one issue.

Yeah, I used to get surprised by that. I saw them do the witch-hunt with the guy that runs hackers.town and then I saw him turn around and participate in another pitchfork mob and this shit no longer surprises me.

That is a very good point, though.

> And then they turn around and play the same game with every other topic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect . It is both depressing and real:

> Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
> In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
> That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.