How Donald Trump Uses Twitter As a Weapon of Fear
HughPickens.com writes: Alexander Burns and Maggie Haberman write in the NYT that with his enormous online platform of six million followers, Donald Trump has used Twitter to badger and humiliate those who have dared cross him during the presidential race, latching on to their vulnerabilities, mocking their physical characteristics, personality quirks and, sometimes, their professional setbacks. Trump has made statements that have later been exposed as false or deceptive — only after they have ricocheted across the Internet. For example, Cheri Jacobus, a Republican political strategist, did not think she had done anything out of the ordinary: On a cable television show, she criticized Donald J. Trump for skipping a debate in Iowa in late January and described him as a "bad debater." Trump took to Twitter, repeatedly branding Jacobus as a disappointed job seeker who had begged to work for his campaign and had been rejected. "We said no and she went hostile," Trump wrote. "A real dummy!" Trump's campaign manager told the same story on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." For days, Trump's followers replied to his posts with demeaning, often sexually charged insults aimed at Jacobus, including several with altered, vulgar photographs of her face.
(continued)
This week, Trump sent out a menacing message on Twitter about the Ricketts family, a wealthy clan of Republican political donors, after it was reported that Marlene Ricketts donated $3 million to a group opposed to Trump's candidacy. "They better be careful," Trump wrote of the family, "they have a lot to hide!" "It's a little surreal when Donald Trump threatens your mom," Marlene Ricketts's son, Tom, later told reporters.
It is not just that Trump has a skill for zeroing in on an individual's soft spot and hammering at it. It is that he sets a tone of aggression against the person, and his supporters echo and amplify it. Jacobus sent a cease-and-desist letter to Trump and his top aide, citing electronic messages that showed the Trump campaign had courted her and not the other way around. "I have been trashed and ruined on Twitter," Jacobus says adding that Trump's lawyers had responded to her letter, but that they had not yet reached a resolution. "At what point does it cross the line into something that's defamatory and might be actionable?" says Parry Aftab, a lawyer who leads the Internet safety group WiredSafety. "At what point does it cross the line into encouraging violence against groups and individuals?"
It is not just that Trump has a skill for zeroing in on an individual's soft spot and hammering at it. It is that he sets a tone of aggression against the person, and his supporters echo and amplify it. Jacobus sent a cease-and-desist letter to Trump and his top aide, citing electronic messages that showed the Trump campaign had courted her and not the other way around. "I have been trashed and ruined on Twitter," Jacobus says adding that Trump's lawyers had responded to her letter, but that they had not yet reached a resolution. "At what point does it cross the line into something that's defamatory and might be actionable?" says Parry Aftab, a lawyer who leads the Internet safety group WiredSafety. "At what point does it cross the line into encouraging violence against groups and individuals?"
Mod articles as trolls?
The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.
It's all a joke until you teenage-angst-ridden sociopaths actually get control of the country.
This is the Century of Fear. Everybody promotes fear. It's what they use to make us willingly offer up our dignity and our freedom.
What's being described here is use of media not as a "weapon of fear", but as an all-out weapon of attack.
Trump has made statements that have later been exposed as false or deceptive â" only after they have ricocheted across the Internet.
Oh, NOW you complain about this. Is this not in fact the way the internet has worked since day one? Is this not in fact the very premise the entire news industry is based on?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I was hoping that this kind of article wouldn't be showing up any more on the "new" Slashdot. I'm digging the new DICE-less Slashdot (and I even downloaded something from SourceForge for the first time in years!), and while this is obviously not a democracy, MHO is that if I want to read superficial and partisan social networking commentaries, I would seek them out (or not!) somewhere else--not on slashdot.
A pathological narcissist, a skilled liar, and possibly a sociopath.
But an eloquent speaker who so far hasn't actually shown any concrete plans on how he plans to guide america.
But very good at spewing mindless rhetoric that people seem to eat up, or at least enjoy watching the clown-car circus that the debates have devolved into.
I fear a showdown between him and Clinton for the highest power in the land. Or in the words of Alien vs. Predator "No matter who wins, we lose"
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
I think he's Trolling all of us. It's like he watched "Bulworth" and was inspired by it but decided to go Right Wing with it.
Seems a reasonable observation.
My personal theory (take this with a big IMHO and cum grano salis) is that one big difference between Republicans and Democrats is that by and by, most Democrats tend to like their party. Most Republicans barely stomach their own party. Thus, it makes sense that if Trump is trolling the Republican party, that a lot of Republicans go right along trolling with him.
So this is clearly a subjective, politically motivated posting. For example, we don't hear the other side of the story, etc. Love or hate Trump, I come to this site for news for nerds, not clap trap about the actions of some candidate. Frankly they all suck, and so holding one higher--or lower as the case may be--is vapid at best. Drop the slanted political "news" and get back to what we come to Slash Dot for.
I think it's more "The Republican Establishment terrorized themselves resulting in Donald Trump becoming a party nominee"
Both parties have little to be proud of in their candidates
ROFLMAO. I'll take the space cadet socialist and the shrill professional pol over the sentient briskets the Repubs have fielded any day of the week, thanks.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Not sure if sarcastic, rhetorical exaggeration, or a literal example of what I was talking about.
Also still not sure if Trump isn't just an elaborate troll on America.
So what I'm getting is that Trump is using Twitter in the exact same way the SJWs use Twitter, but because it's Trump doing it, now it's bad.
Mm-kay.
The problem Twitter has is that it's become a platform for building outrage. People use retweets as a weapon to get their followers to harass people they disagree with. They'll post small, out of context quotes solely for the purpose of building rage. When it's SJWs or the likes of [only] Black Lives Matter doing it, that's fine, and Twitter is all about how cool activism is on their platform.
When Trump does it, now it's the end of the world and we've got to stop those evil people by blocking them.
Uh, no. Either ban both, or ban neither.
I thought that leftists and social justice supporters (who generally oppose Trump) were fully in support of public shaming, especially when it's done online using social media platforms. It is one of their preferred tactics, after all. I mean, there was all that Kony 2012 nonsense, that incident where a couple of programmers were harassed for using the word "dongle", then the faux outrage over "manspreading", and numerous other incidents.
Maybe this is just another example of them being dirty hypocrites, where they're willing to do something to somebody else, but are totally against it happening to them too?
Of course we got control, I turned 20 in early 1984. Now Tump and the rest of us old coots (aka former angst-ridden teen sociopaths) are going to give you little kid shits a long overdue attitude adjustment.
and stay the fuck off my lawn
If you are serious - Trump is the epitome of the Brave coward, He's the guy who will light the world on fire and will force everyone to bend to his will.
And he cannot even stand up to little Megan Fox.
And that dear sir, tells you everything you need to know about the reality show host.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
And slashdot is trying again?
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
(I notice the highly commented article is conspicuously absent from the "you might also like to read" list)
"Oooh, he's such a meany.. he's so mean, like gamer gater mean... only Democrats can be so mean to Republicans on twitter so Trump should be bannnnnned"
You're arguing for anti-bullying speech on one post while simultaneously posting articles calling for the heads of other "non-slashdot" approved persons on others using the exact same bullying tactics being decried here (or have you read your own comment sections? (Including this one)
Stop this free speech for me not for thee crap.
Meh. It's not like the IRS is auditing them or anything.
one big difference between Republicans and Democrats is that by and by, most Democrats tend to like their party. Most Republicans barely stomach their own party.
In other words, Democrats by and large are delusional and Republicans by and large are realists.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Ad hominem attacks instead of reasoned debate are considered NORMAL on every internet forum now. So much so, that I'm sure someone on /. will just call me names instead of citing trustworthy sources to refute my argument. Apparently, on the 'net, arguments are won by the biggest dick, with the most spare time to repeatedly post insults... yeah, that does sound like Trump, doesn't it?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You know, Trump has been the same guy since the 80s when I first became aware of him .. I don't believe he's a parody.
He is that guy, and has been for the last 30 years quite publicly.
I just don't see how that could be an act.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
oh? Trump is planning on gas chambers.
So enforcing the law on immigration criminals or killing ISIL is "like hitler"?
get some perspective. anti-male SJW femni-nazis on tumblr are more like Hitler than Trump.
While we're out here promoting our opinions on the subject of slashdot's Politics section, I'd like to throw my dissenting opinion into the ring.
... but seriously :P)
While you're certainly right that many stories under the Politics section indeed have little to nothing to do with news for nerds, oftentimes they still focus on stuff that matters. Many slashdotters come here not for the tech-focused stories [see also: rtfa], but to enjoy reasoned discussion with their nerdy brethren. See, for example, I cite a post I made the other day, about an admittedly controversial subject: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That subject is no better of a fit for the themes slashdot tends to focus on than is this Trump story, but check it out. That discussion went on for days while staying shockingly civil, levelheaded, objective (particularly the thread with Sun, for which I'm still working on a conciliatory reply). I don't know of many other forums for online discussion where this is even plausible, and that is the reason I encourage the new ownership to not abandon one of the few remaining outlets for such dialog.
tl;dr: Politics on slashdot is awesome because it's still possible to have discussions rooted in reason. At least until the libertarians come out. (I kid, I kid...
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
What I see with this election is the complete loss of civility. Nothing of substance is being said, it's simple mud slinging.
Candidate X: "Mr. Trump, your idea is a bad one and here's why"
Trump: "You're a dummy and your mother wished she'd aborted you with a coat hanger"
Crowd: "*cheers*"
Candidate X: "But what about your idea..."
Trump: "Did I mention you're ugly too!"
Candidate X: "I'm leaving... this is pointless"
Trump: "Yup, there's goes a loser!"
Crowd: "You're the best!!!"
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
I think in a lot of ways, US politics suffers from the tyranny of mediocrity.
We have a system of checks and balances for a reason, and I think part of that reason is so we can take risks on political candidates who don't fall into the category of least worst or best-on-average.
Trump has his buffoonish qualities and some crazy outbursts, like building the ridiculous wall, but I just don't get the sense that he's as bad as he's made out to be, and he does have some kind of compelling traits, like being one of the first candidates to speak out against H1-Bs and not needing to kowtow to party insiders or financial donors.
As a system of positions, I like Sanders more but not exclusively and the other candidates turn me off in various ways. Rubio is paper thin in many of the same ways Obama was, Cruz is such a hard-core ideologue and has some positions I intimately detest, and both, for all their faux rebel status within the party prior to the primaries seem heavily invested in the existing system that benefits donors.
Hillary may well be the best qualified as a political executive, but I also think she's too compliant to donors and too driven by personal ambition and hubris; she's just not trustable, and I don't like many of her positions, either.
I say take a risk on crazy maybe and see what happens. I guess I just don't see our system capable of being ruined permanently by one guy.
No, Cruz: Theocrat.
"They better be careful," Trump wrote of the family, "they have a lot to hide!"
It is wrong for him to do investigations of political opponents, and could be used to get the case thrown out.
It was wrong for the IRS to be misused in this way under Obama.
It was wrong for the IRS to be misused this way under Nixon.
It was wrong, when S&P downgraded the US's bond rating, for Obama to announce a redoubled effort investigating them to see if there was anything they could tag them with as punishment.
This is the purpose of warrant requirements, and the banning of general warrants, so those in power could not go fishing around for something illegal to tag uppity oppoonenta with.
Boo Trump.
Boo Obama.
Boo Nixon.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
The way unemployment data was collected and gathered differed during the Great Depression and current time. Concepts like U3 and U6 did not exist but it estimated that the U3 in the great depression peaked at 25.2% and the U6 peaked at 37.6%. The current U3 is 4.9% and the current U6 is 9.9%. The U3 rate only looks at employed individuals and those currently looking for work. The U6 rate includes those who are unemployed and willing to work but not looking for work and have looked for work in the past twelve months as well as those who are currently employed part-time due to part-time employment not always being able to provide enough income to support the household adequately.
I don't know if there's a figure that includes unemployed that haven't looked for a job in the past twelve months.
The general complaint regarding the U3 is that due to how easy it is for people to fall off from being on that figure while being unemployed. If you've not currently looking for work you're not counted. This can lead to a situation where it's hard to describe the economic burden faced by the workforce in having to support individuals who are not working.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
As a long-time, very-conservative commenter here on Slashdot and a frequent critic of Obama (look up my posting history), I must strongly disagree. Trump would take the worst of Obama and elevate it to heights never dreamed of. He would be terrible for this country and the world.
Simply put, Trump is a "demagogue", as were Hitler and Stalin, that doesn't mean he is inherently evil, it means he is using the same psychological tools to gain power. He has already divided and conquered the GOP with an old fashioned xenophobic wedge, it will take them decades to recover their solidarity. Right now the rest of the planet are just crossing their fingers hoping the American people will stop humouring this wannabe tyrant BEFORE he gets to the whitehouse and starts pushing buttons just to see what happens.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Nobody is perfect. Everyone has done something considered "wrong" in their past
There's a huge difference between 'not perfect' and 'a fucking asshole'.
Also, "he acts like regular people act" in the way that he has no problem talking nonsense and covering that up with bullshitting, bullying and pretty much all the juvenile ways to not have to admit having ever been wrong.
Here's a thought: How about an honest rational decent courteous intelligent guy who always says what he believes and has done so for decades?
Consider what happens when you call someone a pussy or a dick, etc. Do you win the argument or change their opinion? Maybe in your head but in reality the argument is over and there is almost zero hope for a resolution. Essentially both sides are dug in and the only thing left to do is escalate the name calling (apologize? not in this decade). So what happens when you call an elected official a pussy? Probably the same thing as if you called them a very nice person thats saving us all. Nothing. Because you're talking among friends...or more likely posting on the internet.
Now, what happens when the President of the United States calls someone a pussy? It ends all hope of any sort of resolution to the issue that is likely affecting millions of people!
Just because we're all assholes online doesn't mean its ok for elected officials to just be a dick. Being called a dick is derogatory for a reason. But hey, if trump really floats your boat, great. Just make sure you never disagree with him on anything because on that issue you're fucked.