Comments by "HesteBremse" (@HesteBremse) on "" video.

  1. Cambridge Analytica does not even operate or have anything to do with Cambridge – They moved their meetings with Steve Bannon to Cambridge so it would appear so initially... – And sorry but it was said from the very beginning that on Facebook you as the user are the product. If we as users do not change our emotional reaction patterns in place of a reflection based consensus, then we will continue to be manipulated – if not by CA then by someone else. The fatality of our need for drama, storytelling and constant curiosity is unfortunately also our achilles heal. It can not be a secret or rather come as a surprise anymore – When we engage on social media, we are subject to analysis and information gathering. Nothing is for free and neither is Facebook, Google or other socially based internt medias. Knowledge is power. Those that undertake these kind of actions as in this case knows that very well and they know how to utilise this knowledge to their bidding.
    24
  2. By reflection based consensus I mean that everybody must start to (at least try) to think a little different – meaning to reflect up on why a message is coming "your way" and what it actually means – ask why I was sent and what the purpose of it is or what it could be – it would mean to make a secondary reflection on the subject to avoid acting directly or "only" on our emotional responses. There is nothing wrong with emotions, but they belong in certain life situations better than in others. When we are engaging on Social Media and as described in the utility of CA used to wire and strongly affect our perceptions – in this emotional reactions becomes a tool to be abused by those who intend to move us towards different perceptions fitting their agenda. By consensus I mean to collectively understand that our emotional reactions must be challenged by ourself regardless of who we are – Like some rules that are never written down, but something that is understood broadly by a community or group because it serves the group purposefully regardless of different opinions within it. We are humans and we are strongly emotional beings so it is not an easy thing to ask to set aside these emotions and it is also not the real purpose, but if we do not have that extra layer of reflection running, we will remain open targets for emotionally driven content, which essentially often have a completely unemotional goals – Like; Power, Money, Diversion, Confusion and the most utilised political tool "Divide and Conquer" in other words Polarising intent. it is a huge challenge but considering that social media in fact also makes us able to debate and discuss nearly globally, we must try to reach a consensus about how we react to all these constructed influences. The line between truth and reality is becoming constantly more blurred on the digital world we call the internet – because everything can be produced to fit the individual user (target) and it is nearly impossible for each user to check sources and validate content thoroughly. And even here we must also consider why we discuss various subjects – Why do we do it?. There is not only one answer, but for sure we are trying to understand what is going on – Why does one person have this opinion over another, Why can´t or will this person not understand my view or why can I not understand his or her view. If we do not apply a reflection based mindset then we can not expect the outcome of the debate to become fruitful or useful – Meaning we just remain stagnant in our own perception of what is and we remain polarised and so we are fairly easy target regardless of political sides or otherwise. Overall I have no answer how to achieve this consensus – but it is evident that most user profiles have real people in real lifes behind it, even the "Trolls" are real people and so is those that perhaps works for professional influencing companies. Everybody has a history, a social background and it is natural that these factors have had a strong influence on how each person see the world. I would simply advice to remember that when we communicate and to apply similar reflections when we debate or react to content. – Remember that our emotional nature can subject to abuse, so think twice before you react. – Remember that one message on a subject might not be the exact same as another user have seen. – Remember that behind the text in a thread there is mostly real people, but in some cases there are people being paid to act as other persons... – If you suspect that a professional influencer is at work – then regard it as You being on to something important to the subject debated. – Remember there is a chance that a strongly emotional driven content is manufactured to catch You – Ask what is the purpose or intent of it. – Acknowledge that everything on digital media is subject to information gathering – Nothing is for Free, never has been. ___ Secondary and fully on my own account I find that Prejudgment and large scale Generalisation is a huge problem in the global debate. I would suggest anybody regardless of political side and standpoint to avoid these two verbs when debating. If you have numbers or other fact based knowledge then it is not generalisation anymore. Prejudgment is a "super negative" that leaves out any openings for a constructive debate – But it is often what brings people to debate. TY
    1