I hadn't ever heard of the word 'optics' in this sense before a few days ago, and now I'm seeing it everywhere. I guess that's Baader-Meinhof at work again.
I hadn't ever heard of the word 'optics' in this sense before a few days ago, and now I'm seeing it everywhere. I guess that's Baader-Meinhof at work again.
I disagree. If it was "First Lady wears Manolo Blahnik shoes to rally." That would be boring and not news by any measure. The reason I see this as news is that the First Lady was wearing something...
I disagree. If it was "First Lady wears Manolo Blahnik shoes to rally." That would be boring and not news by any measure. The reason I see this as news is that the First Lady was wearing something that could potentially be construed as a huge political statement. It's only not news if you are convinced that it was an accident.
There's a huge discussion potential, and I do believe that Melania wearing a jacket that reads "I really don't care. Do U?" one her way to and from visiting incarcerated children is news. Just as much as if Donald Trump wore a shirt that said "Did he really do anything wrong?" to the Holocaust museum. He could say "It doesn't mean that!!!!! It means something else! It doesn't mean anything!" But it would be news.
Okay okay, you've all convinced me that I was too drastic about it (and my wording was probably too strong as well). I'll move it back to ~news. But in general, I think that we spend far too much...
Okay okay, you've all convinced me that I was too drastic about it (and my wording was probably too strong as well). I'll move it back to ~news.
But in general, I think that we spend far too much time and attention on relatively trivial stories like this one. It drowns out important issues and more substantial investigations and coverage, and has no real effect on the underlying situation. Does the immigration situation actually change at all based on which jacket she wore? Probably not at all, but the news media ends up spending half the day on it because it's good "outrage content".
As a voice of support: It seems like people are using "news" as shorthand for "important." There is such a thing as fashion news. The First Lady is a former fashion model, so presumably what she...
As a voice of support:
It seems like people are using "news" as shorthand for "important." There is such a thing as fashion news. The First Lady is a former fashion model, so presumably what she wears is something she gives more thought to than most. And whatever the intended message, there clearly is one. Whether people here think it's worth paying attention to is obviously up to them, but the presidency is part pageantry and plenty would disagree that the study of political fashion is vapid.
Even if it were, in isolation, fluff, the mere fact that people care about it makes it less than fluff, as much as it may pain some.
I agree. In my reply to Deimos, I said that it's not "just fashion news." It's not like they were gossiping about designers. It could be a huge political (and moral) statement, and I think it's...
I agree. In my reply to Deimos, I said that it's not "just fashion news." It's not like they were gossiping about designers. It could be a huge political (and moral) statement, and I think it's right for the news media to talk about it.
Two-thirds (roughly) of politics stories seem to end up in ~talk, the remainder in ~misc. Really feels like there should be just one, official, spot for them, even if they are fluffy, superficial,...
Two-thirds (roughly) of politics stories seem to end up in ~talk, the remainder in ~misc. Really feels like there should be just one, official, spot for them, even if they are fluffy, superficial, or vapid.
How do you figure? According to the article, the jacket's message was about news media. I struggle to make the connection between calling out fake news (or what she perceives to be fake news) and...
How do you figure? According to the article, the jacket's message was about news media. I struggle to make the connection between calling out fake news (or what she perceives to be fake news) and the "suffering of the masses."
You start with the belief that Melania Trump does not care about kids in cages. Then you see the jacket where it says "I really don't care", which confirms your belief. It doesn't matter that she...
You start with the belief that Melania Trump does not care about kids in cages. Then you see the jacket where it says "I really don't care", which confirms your belief.
It doesn't matter that she says she wore it as a response to the fake news media lying and distorting and smearing people, because if you believe she doesn't care about kids and think that this has been some sort of accident exposing how heartless she is inside, then any alternative explanation can be brushed away as a lie.
This is how the two movies on one screen thing works. Same facts, same screen, and two people can see wildly different realities.
Did she say that, or did Donald Trump say that's why she did it? From this article, it sounds like she (via her spokesperson) said "there was no message" and then Donald decided to give it a...
It doesn't matter that she says she wore it as a response to the fake news media lying and distorting and smearing people
Did she say that, or did Donald Trump say that's why she did it? From this article, it sounds like she (via her spokesperson) said "there was no message" and then Donald decided to give it a message later.
the obvious answer is that she did not say it, that she got the jacket and wore it because she doesn't actually care about kids in cages and wanted everyone to know that. /s :P
the obvious answer is that she did not say it, that she got the jacket and wore it because she doesn't actually care about kids in cages and wanted everyone to know that.
I'm glad this was moved from ~news. If I were to build an incredibly oversimplified model for how I rate the value of a news article, it would look something like this: Value = 3*(Truth) +...
I'm glad this was moved from ~news. If I were to build an incredibly oversimplified model for how I rate the value of a news article, it would look something like this:
Value = 3*(Truth) + 2*(Impact) - (Bias)
While this story is true, it has a fairly low impact (especially when you compare it to other stories in the news about immigration, e.g. legislation, executive orders, immigrants' personal accounts, etc.).
My general approach lately has been to try to think about it like: "If, a week from now, someone asked me what the most important stories of the last week were, would this be likely to make the...
My general approach lately has been to try to think about it like: "If, a week from now, someone asked me what the most important stories of the last week were, would this be likely to make the cut?" If the answer is no, the story probably isn't worth much attention.
So the intention of ~news is for important news rather than simply current news. What's a good guideline for determining important news vs a current event that is getting a lot of attention? I...
So the intention of ~news is for important news rather than simply current news. What's a good guideline for determining important news vs a current event that is getting a lot of attention?
Yeah I wasn't sure if he was sharing his personal view on news, or the site's policy on ~news. Either way, I would like to someday be able to use Tildes to garner a good sense of current events,...
Yeah I wasn't sure if he was sharing his personal view on news, or the site's policy on ~news. Either way, I would like to someday be able to use Tildes to garner a good sense of current events, but maybe that's totally outside the scope of the site's objective.
First lady Melania Trump boarded a flight to a facility housing migrant children separated from their parents wearing a jacket that read “I really don’t care, do u?”
When asked what message the first lady’s jacket intended to send, spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said: “It’s a jacket. There was no hidden message.”
I'm simultaneously surprised that nobody on the First Lady's staff recognized that this could have poor optics and yet not surprised at all.
I hadn't ever heard of the word 'optics' in this sense before a few days ago, and now I'm seeing it everywhere. I guess that's Baader-Meinhof at work again.
It's my favorite phenomenon!
Yea, my first response wasn't outrage, more like "Oooo probably not the best time to wear that jacket", do they even have someone in charge of optics?
Probably but at this point do you think they care?
So we've got a link in "news" with the "fashion" tag. Okay.
Am I the only one who sees this as a non-story?
I just moved it to ~misc. I agree that this isn't "news" by any measure.Okay okay, I'm being too strong about it and I moved it back
I disagree. If it was "First Lady wears Manolo Blahnik shoes to rally." That would be boring and not news by any measure. The reason I see this as news is that the First Lady was wearing something that could potentially be construed as a huge political statement. It's only not news if you are convinced that it was an accident.
There's a huge discussion potential, and I do believe that Melania wearing a jacket that reads "I really don't care. Do U?" one her way to and from visiting incarcerated children is news. Just as much as if Donald Trump wore a shirt that said "Did he really do anything wrong?" to the Holocaust museum. He could say "It doesn't mean that!!!!! It means something else! It doesn't mean anything!" But it would be news.
Okay okay, you've all convinced me that I was too drastic about it (and my wording was probably too strong as well). I'll move it back to ~news.
But in general, I think that we spend far too much time and attention on relatively trivial stories like this one. It drowns out important issues and more substantial investigations and coverage, and has no real effect on the underlying situation. Does the immigration situation actually change at all based on which jacket she wore? Probably not at all, but the news media ends up spending half the day on it because it's good "outrage content".
My bad.
As a voice of support:
It seems like people are using "news" as shorthand for "important." There is such a thing as fashion news. The First Lady is a former fashion model, so presumably what she wears is something she gives more thought to than most. And whatever the intended message, there clearly is one. Whether people here think it's worth paying attention to is obviously up to them, but the presidency is part pageantry and plenty would disagree that the study of political fashion is vapid.
Even if it were, in isolation, fluff, the mere fact that people care about it makes it less than fluff, as much as it may pain some.
Yeah I found "not news by any measure" to be a bit harsh; But I'm fine with trying to post in line with Deimos's expectations
I agree. In my reply to Deimos, I said that it's not "just fashion news." It's not like they were gossiping about designers. It could be a huge political (and moral) statement, and I think it's right for the news media to talk about it.
Two-thirds (roughly) of politics stories seem to end up in ~talk, the remainder in ~misc. Really feels like there should be just one, official, spot for them, even if they are fluffy, superficial, or vapid.
Exactly: then we could all ignore it.
I added topic tag filters a week ago - filter out "politics".
It's not news per say, but it's a reminder of how oblivious the elite are to suffering of the masses.
How do you figure? According to the article, the jacket's message was about news media. I struggle to make the connection between calling out fake news (or what she perceives to be fake news) and the "suffering of the masses."
You start with the belief that Melania Trump does not care about kids in cages. Then you see the jacket where it says "I really don't care", which confirms your belief.
It doesn't matter that she says she wore it as a response to the fake news media lying and distorting and smearing people, because if you believe she doesn't care about kids and think that this has been some sort of accident exposing how heartless she is inside, then any alternative explanation can be brushed away as a lie.
This is how the two movies on one screen thing works. Same facts, same screen, and two people can see wildly different realities.
Did she say that, or did Donald Trump say that's why she did it? From this article, it sounds like she (via her spokesperson) said "there was no message" and then Donald decided to give it a message later.
the obvious answer is that she did not say it, that she got the jacket and wore it because she doesn't actually care about kids in cages and wanted everyone to know that.
/s :P
I'm glad this was moved from ~news. If I were to build an incredibly oversimplified model for how I rate the value of a news article, it would look something like this:
Value = 3*(Truth) + 2*(Impact) - (Bias)
While this story is true, it has a fairly low impact (especially when you compare it to other stories in the news about immigration, e.g. legislation, executive orders, immigrants' personal accounts, etc.).
My general approach lately has been to try to think about it like: "If, a week from now, someone asked me what the most important stories of the last week were, would this be likely to make the cut?" If the answer is no, the story probably isn't worth much attention.
So the intention of ~news is for important news rather than simply current news. What's a good guideline for determining important news vs a current event that is getting a lot of attention?
I guess once things break out further, a ~news.discussion or ~news.currentevents.discussion could work for helping with this type of distinction.
Yeah I wasn't sure if he was sharing his personal view on news, or the site's policy on ~news. Either way, I would like to someday be able to use Tildes to garner a good sense of current events, but maybe that's totally outside the scope of the site's objective.
I mean she's right. The message was in no way hidden.
It's all tied into unintentional bias. It's kind of like the whole Starbucks issue.
17 year old me is really into the jacket but would never dare to wear it...