Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russia Is Investigating Fidget Spinners After Reports Claim They 'Zombify' Youth (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the fun-and-exciting dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: In a recent report, Russia-24, a state-owned news channel, suggests that fidget spinners are being used by Russian opposition parties in order to recruit young people. As reported by The New York Times, the reporters in Russia-24's initial story say, "It is a mystery why it has become so popular in Russia right now. Who is promoting this to the masses so actively?" The video segment says the toys were being distributed at a rally for opposition leader Alexei Navalny and in online ads that direct viewers to YouTube channels that promote opposition politicians. The reporters said that while the toy's popularity was declining in the West, fidget spinners are more popular than ever in Russia. "As you can see here there is only writing in English, on the other side there is not a word in Russian," says one of the show's anchors during the report, presenting a new spinner in its packaging to the camera. According to Newsweek, a second report on Russia-24 also aired on July 12th, directly saying fidget spinners were an "object for zombifying" and a form of "hypnosis." The program featured a report from psychologist Svetlana Filatova, claiming that the spinners could help dexterity in children but otherwise "dulls" people's minds. The reports spurred Russia's consumer protection agency, Rospotrebnadzor, into action, saying on Tuesday they would launch an investigation into the toy.

27 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Imagine by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Imagine a country where all the media is basically Breitbart

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re: Imagine by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or far worse, one where the supposed leader tried desperately to convince the masses Brietbart is the one honest media source and the rest are "fake news", and has a scary amount of success with the approach.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    2. Re:Imagine by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where's that?

      And is Breitbart worse than CNN?

      Wouldn't a rational person read / watch CNN, NYT, Breitbart, HuffPost, Reason, Zero Hedge, Mother Jones, Infowars, Final Call, etc...

      Scary when Alex Jones says there were mass rapes and gropes on New Years in Germany and the NYTs (which you read daily) doesn't mention anything. You dismiss it as Alex Jones hysteria - and then months later it comes out that Alex Jones was right and the NYTs hid something horrible.

      The moral of the story is read a little bit of everything and not get locked into a self-referencing echo chamber.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    3. Re:Imagine by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where's that?

      And is Breitbart worse than CNN?

      Wouldn't a rational person read / watch CNN, NYT, Breitbart, HuffPost, Reason, Zero Hedge, Mother Jones, Infowars, Final Call, etc...

      Scary when Alex Jones says there were mass rapes and gropes on New Years in Germany and the NYTs (which you read daily) doesn't mention anything. You dismiss it as Alex Jones hysteria - and then months later it comes out that Alex Jones was right and the NYTs hid something horrible.

      The moral of the story is read a little bit of everything and not get locked into a self-referencing echo chamber.

      Translation: "We must strike a balance between truth and lies."

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    4. Re: Imagine by Verdatum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sorry, no, not far worse; not until the criticized reporters start turning up dead.

    5. Re:Imagine by spun · · Score: 2

      For that to be a good analogy, you would have to have included something left wing as well as the centrist, libertarian, and right wing sources you mentioned. No, Huffpost and Mother Jones are not leftist, they are both pro-corporate centrist organizations.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    6. Re:Imagine by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, he is right, and it's what I do as well. It's nice if you could find a news source that is the truth, the whole truth and no lies, but let's be honest: even the news outlets that aspire to this (and many of them don't) fail to achieve it. So it's not about a compromise between truth and lies; it's about getting viewpoints from different perspectives. Shake up your faith in those unshakable truths a little, and read opposing opinions and sources that will cast doubt on those so called truths. You need to be able to filter crap from credible sources, though.

      Once I started reading publications from all parts of the political spectrum instead of just my favorite newspaper and a blog or 2, I realised what a myopic view on the world such a limited set of sources resulted in.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    7. Re:Imagine by grasshoppa · · Score: 2

      >Translation: "We must strike a balance between truth and lies."

      Is that what you got from his post? It was actually pretty insightful ( no mod points, sorry ), and it's precisely what I do. It helps counter the bias inherent in each source where you result in actual information.

      Do it long enough the weasel words media outlets like to use really start jumping out at you.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    8. Re:Imagine by rogoshen1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i'd wager that a fair number of people do not read the news to stay informed, but to reinforce the views they already hold.

    9. Re:Imagine by grasshoppa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      CNN has already retracted..what? One story about Trump and Russia? Yes, you can argue that by retracting it they are maintaining their integrity, but that they published it in the first place kind of gives lie to it.

      Huffpo is no better than Breitbart in my book, it's laughable you'd include it even the same sentence as CNN.

      Point being, no news source is balanced. Accepting a 'balanced viewpoint' is effectively surrendering your own critical thinking skills in favor of theirs. That's why you read all of them. You learn to see their bias, and you learn how to correct for it.

      As far as my "political compass"; I've been horrified by politics ever since I started voted ( before really ). That's really the only rational response to the insanity that plays out every couple years across the country.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    10. Re:Imagine by skam240 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So CNN has had to retract a single story about Russia? What's your point? News agencies make mistakes.

      Now if they made a habbit of doing that then the case could be made that they're biasly running fake news as far fewer people generally see a retraction then who saw the offending article. Making a single retraction means something though? Gimme a break

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    11. Re:Imagine by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. A rational person would cut out the Breitbart and Infowars for sure. They're known to be full of fake news, sensationalism, and an overt bias that is flaunted. A rational person would seek out news sources that attempt to play fair, be honest, be accurate, and make a good faith attempt to reduce bias.

      Yes, a reporter who parrots whatever random gossip that is overheard will sometimes be right. That does not mean the reporter has special insights and should be followed. Did Alex Jones actualy investigate this story, or just repeat it? When 99% is provably crap then you'd better be sure that 1% is a diamond before you go fishing it out with your fingers.

    12. Re:Imagine by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Be careful that when you try to read opposing viewpoints that you're not reading crazy conspiracy theories. Fox is so overtly biased and with editorials masquerading as news stories, that you can't take all of it seriously and you have to sift through it very carefully. You don't balance a slight liberal bent with an overt conservative approach that is constantly on the attack. You cannot put Fox as an equal balance to the BBC for example. But Fox is sane here compared to the wackos like Breitbart or Infowars or World Net Daily.

      Sure, listen to different views, but do not give them all equal weight! It is very useful to know what some of the extremist views are, and useful to know if those views are gaining popularity, but you should not treat those views as part of the balance with the truth residing at the average of it all.

      A good viewpoint to get is from foreign or international sources. BBC, AFP, Al Jazeera, The Economist, etc.

    13. Re:Imagine by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      CNN is going downhill. However it's not going downhill because it's turning radically liberal. It's going downhill because it's focusing on the sensational stories, sticking with the pointless stories for months in order to keep the eyeballs.

    14. Re:Imagine by ShakaUVM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >CNN, NYT, HuffPost, (notice how there were only three of these) are long established news sources presenting a balanced viewpoint.

      Hah. No. I don't even think that any of these three would even pretend they're presenting a balanced viewpoint these days. CNN has been caught running the Russia story just for ratings, despite thinking there's nothing actually there, NYT had a complete meltdown on election night (want to see a screenshot? I took a screenshot), and the HuffPo is described as a "politically liberal American news and opinion website."

      If you don't believe me, here's Harvard on the matter -

      https://shorensteincenter.org/...

    15. Re: Imagine by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's so amazing that after everything that's happened, CNN is still trusted by some people. That's just astounding. They've been caught broadcasting fake news so many times it's not funny. They outright became part of the Clinton campaign. This is verifiable fact. The truth came out and Wikileaks confirms it.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    16. Re:Imagine by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Where's that?

      Russia for example, China for another.

      And is Breitbart worse than CNN?

      Yes

      Wouldn't a rational person read / watch CNN, NYT, Breitbart, HuffPost, Reason, Zero Hedge, Mother Jones, Infowars, Final Call, etc...

      No

      Scary when Alex Jones says there were mass rapes and gropes on New Years in Germany and the NYTs (which you read daily) doesn't mention anything. You dismiss it as Alex Jones hysteria - and then months later it comes out that Alex Jones was right and the NYTs hid something horrible.

      Here's one link to just one of NYT's stories covering the gropings: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/0...

      The moral of the story is read a little bit of everything and not get locked into a self-referencing echo chamber.

      Not everything is worth reading nor does it need to be read to get completely unbiased views. Hateful lies, shock stories, and conspiracy theories do not make news "balanced".

      Are there any other questions I can help you with?

    17. Re:Imagine by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Point being, no news source is balanced.

      True. But there are some that are so unbalanced that even the drunks who can't stand without support from a wall are laughing at them.

    18. Re:Imagine by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

      Because this sort of behavior ought not be covered up by the mainstream media. Does it make sense to you to NOT report news because it may cast a negative light on a group of people?

      If the KKK was throwing acid on black women's faces wouldn't you find it outrageous if it was not reported by the NYTs?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  2. Re:Czar Putin by war4peace · · Score: 2

    All dictators try keeping their people as stupid as possible.

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  3. Wait.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Aren't these the folks that gave us Tetris?

    1. Re:Wait.... by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 3, Funny

      IMHO, the spinner retaliation against Tetris is a bit overkill.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  4. Re:Russia says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Repeat slowly until it sinks in: STATE. RUN. MEDIA. SOURCE.

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Re:What's even funnier is that... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

    I'm surprised that here in the U.S. people haven't been doing the same since January.

  7. Warning: MSM purchases sock puppets by s.petry · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pretty damn obvious when a post saying "one should read them all" gets moderated troll, and the name calling posts against Breitbart get moderated +5 insightful. Facts may hurt on occasion, but they are facts.

    All of media today lies, plain and simple. CNN, and NBC have both been caught repeatedly fabricating, staging, and editing content to promote a narrative instead of performing actual journalism. Watch either of those 2 stations and you hear the half a set of fact they need to support the narrative they want you to hear and believe. Nothing more. Not unique to them, just the most obvious offenders.

    It is the information vacuum which gives rise to sites like Infowars. They lie too! If you want to see how bad US media has become with propaganda, just read about the same topic on NYT and Breitbart and compare. Watch CNN and Fox and compare. Same subject, two separate sets of facts being discussed, and two completely different opinions being presented. Amazingly, they both tend to favor the leftist agenda.

    Journalism in the US is dead, and has been for quite a while. The only difference between today and 10 years ago is that it's easier to see media caught in the act. Trust in Journalism is the only thing lower than approval for politicians.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re: Warning: MSM purchases sock puppets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Pretty damn obvious when a post saying "one should read them all" gets moderated troll, and the name calling posts against Breitbart get moderated +5 insightful.

      Yes, that GLMDesigns, is, like yourself, recognized as a troll, and the community also realizes that Breitbart is a steaming pile of shit.

      So a non-genuine bit of sophistry gets modded down, and you, a fellow traveler, get upset over it. Because, admit to it or not, you really are desperate for affirmation?

      Facts may hurt on occasion, but they are facts.

      Facts are slippery things, and well-suited to misrepresentations and deceits. You should know that yourself. You do make quite a considerable effort to build your house of lies on a slim foundation of truth.

      All of media today lies, plain and simple. CNN, and NBC have both been caught repeatedly fabricating, staging, and editing content to promote a narrative instead of performing actual journalism. Watch either of those 2 stations and you hear the half a set of fact they need to support the narrative they want you to hear and believe. Nothing more. Not unique to them, just the most obvious offenders.

      No, there are much more blatantly obvious distorters pushing their narrative agenda out there. Sinclair Broadcast Group, for example, is quite egregious.

      You really don't have much discernment on that regard.

      It is the information vacuum which gives rise to sites like Infowars. They lie too!

      No, it isn't a vacuum, it is a fan that blows a lot of shit.

      If you want to see how bad US media has become with propaganda, just read about the same topic on NYT and Breitbart and compare.

      Or put a camera on a bunch of children, then ask them their story about what happened when they start misbehaving. Or trained police officers. Or yourself. You know you've given accounts that vary based on your mood at the time.

      Watch CNN and Fox and compare. Same subject, two separate sets of facts being discussed, and two completely different opinions being presented. Amazingly, they both tend to favor the leftist agenda.

      Oh, silly s.petry, still beholden to a false narrative portrayal of political spectrum. You would be less of an arse if you simply abandoned that concept of two-dimensional politics.

      Journalism in the US is dead, and has been for quite a while. The only difference between today and 10 years ago is that it's easier to see media caught in the act.

      Or you could just watch Citizen Kane. Or a Shakespeare play. Or a Greek drama. It's like you are way out of touch with the actual historical record.

      Or maybe you just aren't very sophisticated.

      Trust in Journalism is the only thing lower than approval for politicians.

      Mysterious how much trust you have in those polls, when you use them to craft your own narrative. Most mysterious.