Onion Story Gets Blown Out of Proportion 641
A 3-year-old Onion video titled "Martial Law Plans Revealed?" has swept across the internet recently, and taken the gullible along with it. The video has some preaching from the highest mountain top about the evils of a government turning fascist, and an equal number explaining until red in the face what The Onion is.
Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
...remember what they said about Gillette in February 2004 [theonion.com]? And then what happened in September, 2005 [cnn.com]?
(Now let's watch as The Onion replaces the writings of Nostradamus as the road map to an apocalyptic future.)
Gullibility, it's what's for dinner! (Score:3, Interesting)
Moving on, our next topics are Santa Clause, Jesus, the Tooth Fairy, and honesty in government.
Re:Some things never change... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's War of the Worlds 2010.
And I've wondeded whether the reaction to the War of the Worlds broadcast made people in the US, at the time, more skeptical of radio broadcasts, thus less susceptable to broadcast propaganda than those in other countries (or audiences), and thus led to the US neutrality in WW II until the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
One thing the reaction to this item shows: The current government has some people prepared to believe that martial law and fascism are on their agenda.
Not sure if the rumor is a good or bad thing. On one hand it will make people more skeptical again. On the other, like the parable of the kid who cried "Wolf!", it could delay or abort public opposition if the real thing does come along. (How convenient for any hypothetical neofascists.)
The last thing I want to see is the idea planted in the heads of ANY US administration that they COULD get away with it. B-(
Re:Suckaz (Score:5, Interesting)
I attend political debates, couple of times a month with different audiences and I have yet to meet a single person from the left mistake Onion with real news. I have also very rarely seen people from the right make that mistake. However, people who attend these talks are most likely better educated.
Back on topic, regarding general public this was released three years ago and at the time the left didn't come out and mistake this with real news. From looking at Facebook and Twitter, it seems like a whole lot of people on the right have been duped.
Re:Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
My favorite was always the 2000 article Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over [theonion.com]... almost everything in the article came true.
Re:Poe's Law at it's best (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Suckaz (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think it actually shows Americans are crazy, I think it reflects the deep-set distrust Americans have of their government. And this is something that extends from the left to the right. And it's probably a good thing.
Re:Suckaz (Score:1, Interesting)
We slam the right because the right is stupid. Isn't it obvious?
Re:Internet Stupidity Test (Score:3, Interesting)
I had a paper copy of the onion, with ONION printed in bold on the top for the cover story that Congress makes a law banning Metallica. I placed it on a metallica fan's desk here at work and he went ape crazy for an hour until someone told him to read all of the paper carefully.
I love my subscription to the Onion... it works great for screwing with people...
Re:Suckaz (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm sorry, but 'knew about 9/11 in advance' is not '9/11 was an inside job.' Thirty five percent is a minority, and 'not sure' means 'not sure,' so I'm in the majority.
Please report to remedial English, and after that, remedial math, m'kay?
Re:Suckaz (Score:4, Interesting)
Ok, for the birth-ers you're gonna have to bear with me a second. I don't buy it, nor do I think it would matter even if it was true. The claim was that he wasn't born in the US, lets say they are right, his mother was still a US citizen so he would still be able to claim us citizenship from birth anyway. They also had some argument about the type of birth documentation that was needed, and the piece they were looking for was never given. Some lesser piece was. And at this point if it became that big a deal (which apparently it did) who is to say that he couldn't forge the document? But like I said it doesn't matter he was sworn in and it wouldn't change anything. About the only thing that would happen if it was true is that it would allow Arnold a presidential bid. So, does it deserve mocking? It was important enough to be in the constitution, but they should have dropped it as soon as he was sworn in.
Did anyone actually think there would be "death panels" in the health care bill? From what I got from all the news coverage about death panels it just seemed like people were saying this bill could lead to it. They were following the slippery slope to its soylent green conclusion. I believe the actual argument for death panels went more like: The new health care bill will raise health care costs to the government, which will in turn cause the government to first cut "unnecessary" services to health care, which some group will need to decide what will be cut, which at some later time maybe 20 years from now will require cuts to elderly care, which at some point became 'death panels'; but I don't think anyone honestly thought that the bill in its current form was going to have death panels in them. If people actually believed that, then maybe they do deserve mocking; to me I thought it was just hyperbole.
As for the TEA party, the neocons in there are messing the hole thing up. The core of the tea party was fiscal responsibility. Lower taxes and reduce spending. Anything beyond that doesn't belong in the TEA party. It makes it hard for the people in the middle to associate with the TEA party when they start taking on social issues. Sarah Palin is ripe for mockery and her support of the TEA party actual keeps a lot of people from the middle and left out of the party. If you want social conservatism join the GOP, if you just want the fiscal conservatism but not the social bigotry that is where the TEA party got its initial push. It really sucks that the neocons took it over.
Anyway. I don't fit anywhere politically anymore. I grew up republican, but can't stand their imperialistic foreign policy, stance on gay and abortion rights, position on the war on drugs, etc; but I do think they understand economics better in word, but not in deed. They talk like fiscal conservatives, but they spend as much as the democrats. So where does that put someone who wants to download unlimited media at under $20 a month, drink a beer on Sunday after mowing the lawn, smoke a joint when on vacation, go to a gay friends wedding, and stop getting raped on my income taxes?
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)