Also in the News - Part 2

[Leeds Fox]

46 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

... but they didn't tell them the specifics unless the whole rescue operation was then trotted out purely for show? It would be be rather pointless when you can be almost absolutely sure the vessel has been lost with all hands.

 

 

I agree with all of this, but a comment on the bolded:

 

I think it is a stupid and puerile world that we live in that revealing the location of a seafaring vessel is more important than even one human life, let alone five, because it's true at the present time that revealing that location would put more lives at risk and that logic is sound.

 

The logic is impeccable, it's just a judgement on how stupidly tribal a species we can be.

Good points! 

I’d assume neither of us can say what was communicated between the agencies, however it’s worth remembering the noise wasn’t necessarily 100% the implosion, it could’ve been a collision or something completely unrelated, the rescue mission was probably worth the pursuing. Even if the chances of a recovery were slim. 
 

Very true on the second point. I was commenting using logic rather than opinion. Whether or not I agree, the submarine could have anything on it, foregoing its location, comms capability, sonar signature etc etc could risk many more lives in the future.

 

All guesswork but as per, the whole truth will never be known. 
 

Edit - The noise was clearly the implosion. At the time they may not have been 100% sure exactly what it was. 

Edited 23 June 2023 by Leeds Fox

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Leeds Fox said:

Good points! 

I’d assume neither of us can say what was communicated between the agencies, however it’s worth remembering the noise wasn’t necessarily 100% the implosion, it could’ve been a collision or something completely unrelated, the rescue mission was probably worth the pursuing. Even if the chances of a recovery were slim. 
 

Yep, I would agree and expanded on this above.

 

5 minutes ago, Leeds Fox said:

 

Very true on the second point. I was commenting using logic rather than opinion. Whether or not I agree, the submarine could have anything on it, foregoing its location, comms capability, sonar signature etc etc could risk many more lives in the future.

 

All guesswork but as per, the whole truth will never be known. 
 

Edit - The noise was clearly the implosion. At the time they may not have been 100% sure exactly what it was. 

And that logic is solid as a rock at the present time.

 

I just hope that one day we might move beyond being cavemen with sharper suits and fancier toys so that logic will no longer have to make so much sense.

[st albans fox]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I think there was possibly a middle ground here.

 

Say that the vessel was in all likelihood lost with all hands, but equipment is going out there to salvage and investigate and (in the incredible possibility that they may have survived) look for survivors, same as the aftermath of a catastrophic plane crash. Rather that than blowing the whole thing up into an international media "race against the clock". That was rather dishonest for base purposes IMO.

Who was responsible for blowing it up into an international media race?  The media or the us coastguard ? 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

Who was responsible for blowing it up into an international media race?  The media or the us coastguard ? 

This is conjecture, but I would say both, unless the Coastguard and/or other relevant authorities come out and say point blank "we told everyone involved the vessel was likely lost, here's the receipts".

 

Because without that, it seems to be a mix of (accidental or deliberate) miscommunication by the powers that be, and a media chomping at the bit for clicks and sales of a "human interest" story that's actually just five people sadly lost at sea.

[Leeds Fox]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

This is conjecture, but I would say both, unless the Coastguard and/or other relevant authorities come out and say point blank "we told everyone involved the vessel was likely lost, here's the receipts".

 

Because without that, it seems to be a mix of (accidental or deliberate) miscommunication by the powers that be, and a media chomping at the bit for clicks and sales of a "human interest" story that's actually just five people sadly lost at sea.

‘Likely lost’ scenario provides a chance of survival (however slim) that the Coast Guard had a duty to act upon.

 

I think the fact that we don’t know the whole truth shows that the Coast Guard/Authorities didn’t necessarily provide the media with information.

 

They were doing their job which was an almost impossible task with the media all over it. Having to source external help meant that leaks to the media were going to happen.

 

I’m not just blindly disagreeing @leicsmac, you have some great points, but from experience in a similar field, I just have a differing opinion. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Leeds Fox said:

‘Likely lost’ scenario provides a chance of survival (however slim) that the Coast Guard had a duty to act upon.

 

I think the fact that we don’t know the whole truth shows that the Coast Guard/Authorities didn’t necessarily provide the media with information.

 

They were doing their job which was an almost impossible task with the media all over it. Having to source external help meant that leaks to the media were going to happen.

 

I’m not just blindly disagreeing @leicsmac, you have some great points, but from experience in a similar field, I just have a differing opinion. 

I don't think we're actually disagreeing that much at all, we're just looking at it from differing angles.

 

I certainly agree that the authorities should have gotten some stuff out there no matter what, for the purposes of salvage and investigation, at the very least. And I agree that there was in all likelihood a miscommunication between the powers that be and the media.

 

The only thing I'm really adding is that both the media and authorities can and should perhaps have been more honest with the public from the start here.

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

I think there was possibly a middle ground here.

 

Say that the vessel was in all likelihood lost with all hands, but equipment is going out there to salvage and investigate and (in the incredible possibility that they may have survived) look for survivors, same as the aftermath of a catastrophic plane crash. Rather that than blowing the whole thing up into an international media "race against the clock". That was rather dishonest for base purposes IMO.

They're not really responsible for the press deciding to turn it into a transfer deadline day style palaver. They informed the coast guard, and the coast guard will have approached on a search and rescue/confirm the noise was the sub mission for precisely what you mentioned, the miraculous possibility they survived 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

They're not really responsible for the press deciding to turn it into a transfer deadline day style palaver. They informed the coast guard, and the coast guard will have approached on a search and rescue/confirm the noise was the sub mission for precisely what you mentioned, the miraculous possibility they survived 

As per above, I'm not sure it's all entirely the media's fault and there may have been some miscommunication somewhere along the chain, given there's a pretty big difference between "we're pretty sure it imploded but we should look for a miracle anyway" and "vessel is missing, implied intact and people could well still be alive in there!" If they come out now and show evidence to prove what they said was the truth, then fair enough.

 

Again, as per above, I'm of the opinion both parties could have been much more honest.

[The Doctor]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

As per above, I'm not sure it's all entirely the media's fault and there may have been some miscommunication somewhere along the chain, given there's a pretty big difference between "we're pretty sure it imploded but we should look for a miracle anyway" and "vessel is missing, implied intact and people could well still be alive in there!" If they come out now and show evidence to prove what they said was the truth, then fair enough.

 

Again, as per above, I'm of the opinion both parties could have been much more honest.

In all fairness, there were numerous submersibles experts and people who've been down on these deep sea expeditions saying the likelihood of survival was basically non-existent and the media wasn't giving them a sniff until after confirmation of the implosion. The media cycle for this was shaped by the desire for a constantly evolving story that kept people coming back and giving the websites the click metrics they want, the navy and coastguard saying "these experts you're ignoring saying that it almost certainly suffered a catastrophic failure with the loss of all lives are right, it almost certainly did" wouldn't have shifted the needle that much 

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

In all fairness, there were numerous submersibles experts and people who've been down on these deep sea expeditions saying the likelihood of survival was basically non-existent and the media wasn't giving them a sniff until after confirmation of the implosion. The media cycle for this was shaped by the desire for a constantly evolving story that kept people coming back and giving the websites the click metrics they want, the navy and coastguard saying "these experts you're ignoring saying that it almost certainly suffered a catastrophic failure with the loss of all lives are right, it almost certainly did" wouldn't have shifted the needle that much 

That may well be accurate tbh, it certainly wouldn't be the first time mass media have done something similar.

 

I've been trying to find something that someone said on here a while back along the lines of "if everyone is receiving different truths, then public discourse is dead and everyone is fvcked". The lack of honesty here made me think of that.

[The Doctor]

Just now, leicsmac said:

That may well be accurate tbh, it certainly wouldn't be the first time mass media have done something similar.

 

I've been trying to find something that someone said on here a while back along the lines of "if everyone is receiving different truths, then public discourse is dead and everyone is fvcked". The lack of honesty here made me think of that.

I mean, I hate saying it because it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but the press these days prioritise clicks and viewing metrics over journalistic integrity. Take the current bollocks about "kids in schools identifying as cats" which makes its way up to Starmer and Badenoch commenting on it. It's obviously bollocks, there was never so much as a hint otherwise (it's literally an american talking point where fox news level talking heads have talked about "schools having litter boxes for kids in classrooms" which is technically true in at least one case in the most depressing way possible - it's an emergency toilet so the kids aren't pissing themselves in extended active shooter situations). The slighest bit of research would have seen that it was all made up, but the press ran with it, got the views, got comments out of Birbalsingh, Starmer and Badenoch and then continued to run with those. So an obvious lie spreads around the country because reporting the lie was more valuable to the british press than fact checking their stories.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

I mean, I hate saying it because it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but the press these days prioritise clicks and viewing metrics over journalistic integrity. Take the current bollocks about "kids in schools identifying as cats" which makes its way up to Starmer and Badenoch commenting on it. It's obviously bollocks, there was never so much as a hint otherwise (it's literally an american talking point where fox news level talking heads have talked about "schools having litter boxes for kids in classrooms" which is technically true in at least one case in the most depressing way possible - it's an emergency toilet so the kids aren't pissing themselves in extended active shooter situations). The slighest bit of research would have seen that it was all made up, but the press ran with it, got the views, got comments out of Birbalsingh, Starmer and Badenoch and then continued to run with those. So an obvious lie spreads around the country because reporting the lie was more valuable to the british press than fact checking their stories.

And not only is it pretty morally reprehensible, in some matters it's actively harmful and dangerous.

[yorkie1999]

53 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

I mean, I hate saying it because it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but the press these days prioritise clicks and viewing metrics over journalistic integrity. Take the current bollocks about "kids in schools identifying as cats" which makes its way up to Starmer and Badenoch commenting on it. It's obviously bollocks, there was never so much as a hint otherwise (it's literally an american talking point where fox news level talking heads have talked about "schools having litter boxes for kids in classrooms" which is technically true in at least one case in the most depressing way possible - it's an emergency toilet so the kids aren't pissing themselves in extended active shooter situations). The slighest bit of research would have seen that it was all made up, but the press ran with it, got the views, got comments out of Birbalsingh, Starmer and Badenoch and then continued to run with those. So an obvious lie spreads around the country because reporting the lie was more valuable to the british press than fact checking their stories.

You may well think it's bollocks, but it's not. I know for a fact that one of the local leicester schools has a pupil that identifies as a cat and has to be given a saucer of milk at break time, another Leicester school has a pupil that identifies as a fox and walks round with a bushy tail hanging out the back of their trousers.

[Jon the Hat]

7 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

You may well think it's bollocks, but it's not. I know for a fact that one of the local leicester schools has a pupil that identifies as a cat and has to be given a saucer of milk at break time, another Leicester school has a pupil that identifies as a fox and walks round with a bushy tail hanging out the back of their trousers.

He doesn’t care if it true, doesn’t fit his narrative.

[leicsmac]

10 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

You may well think it's bollocks, but it's not. I know for a fact that one of the local leicester schools has a pupil that identifies as a cat and has to be given a saucer of milk at break time, another Leicester school has a pupil that identifies as a fox and walks round with a bushy tail hanging out the back of their trousers.

 

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

He doesn’t care if it true, doesn’t fit his narrative.

I'm pretty sure that yorkie has tongue in cheek there and you took him too seriously, Jon.

 

NB. Perhaps one day @The Doctor will actually get an credible answer to his scientific thoughts on the matter rather than just cherry-picking the emotionalist parts. One day. Perhaps.

Edited 23 June 2023 by leicsmac

[Jon the Hat]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

 

I'm pretty sure that yorkie has tongue in cheek there and you took him too seriously, Jon.

Probably, but it’s not made up. Any teenager knows about furries.

[The Doctor]

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Probably, but it’s not made up. Any teenager knows about furries.

And schools are not accomodating that like the outrage machine claims. They're not sticking cat litter in classrooms for the furry student or anything else. It is simply not happening. 

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Probably, but it’s not made up. Any teenager knows about furries.

Certainly, but what is made up, unless conclusively proven by a credible source, is "kids in schools identifying as cats" and schools accommodating them.

 

The media publishing that narrative is just choosing to satisfy the confirmation bias of people on the matter rather than actually giving the truth.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

And schools are not accomodating that like the outrage machine claims. They're not sticking cat litter in classrooms for the furry student or anything else. It is simply not happening. 

Yeah, snap.

[The Doctor]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly, but what is made up, unless conclusively proven by a credible source, is "kids in schools identifying as cats" and schools accommodating them.

 

The media publishing that narrative is just choosing to satisfy the confirmation bias of people on the matter rather than actually giving the truth.

And this ties back into my original point. Some kids like furry culture is the maximum kernel of truth here (because kids in the UK don't have less rights than guns, unlike in the US) and is a nothingburger. It's not something that will generate views. But, inventing a fake story with a ****ing scam email standard text? Well, that'll get the clicks and the ad revenue because people want to be outraged by this

[yorkie1999]

12 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

And schools are not accomodating that like the outrage machine claims. They're not sticking cat litter in classrooms for the furry student or anything else. It is simply not happening. 

Honestly, it is happening, no joke , no tongue in cheek! and schools are having to accomodate it.

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

And this ties back into my original point. Some kids like furry culture is the maximum kernel of truth here (because kids in the UK don't have less rights than guns, unlike in the US) and is a nothingburger. It's not something that will generate views. But, inventing a fake story with a ****ing scam email standard text? Well, that'll get the clicks and the ad revenue because people want to be outraged by this

If your original point was relating to that Rye College story earlier this week (apologies if it wasn't), wasn't the main outrage about the teacher's behaviour rather than the cat claim? The way she completely lost it because the girls happened to have a different view to hers was pretty shocking.

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

And this ties back into my original point. Some kids like furry culture is the maximum kernel of truth here (because kids in the UK don't have less rights than guns, unlike in the US) and is a nothingburger. It's not something that will generate views. But, inventing a fake story with a ****ing scam email standard text? Well, that'll get the clicks and the ad revenue because people want to be outraged by this

... yeah, and then you get different truths being fed to different people and discourse is dead and everyone is fvcked.

 

Oh dear.

 

4 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Honestly, it is happening, no joke , no tongue in cheek! and schools are having to accomodate it.

Is there more to this than anecdotes or is Hitchens Razor going to apply again?

[The Doctor]

5 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Honestly, it is happening, no joke , no tongue in cheek! and schools are having to accomodate it.

Honestly, it's not happening. https://schoolsweek.co.uk/gender-row-school-none-of-our-pupils-identify-as-a-cat/

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

Honestly, it's not happening. https://schoolsweek.co.uk/gender-row-school-none-of-our-pupils-identify-as-a-cat/

I don't think yorkie's claim was specifically about Rye College.