you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Sure, if you squint really hard you could see some sort of political machinations in the higher echelons of Google, but on the balance of probabilities it's probably just a single person filmed using ambiguous words with unfortunate and unintentional implications in a casual setting.

That really sounds like you're doing your hardest to minimize the problem, rather than actually pay attention to it. You've made all these definitive statements about the video, but it seems like you haven't even watched it...

[–]worm 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sounds to me like people are jumping at shadows over de-contextualized snippets of casual conversation.

I'm sure that the shadows conceal something. I'm not sure that this video really sheds any light on the shadows themselves. I'll start paying attention when they bring out real evidence of active political manoeuvres or when Veritas releases the full unedited video. Until then, I'm just taking his video as one of the many political cheap-shots flying around left right and centre.

[–]magnora7[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

de-contextualized snippets of casual conversation.

It's 25 minutes of unedited video... you are grasping at straws here worm. Try watching it rather than making conjecture about it

[–]worm 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If there's an unedited video I've certainly not seen it. What I have seen is a video of several 10 to 15-second clips of someone talking with lots of commentary in between.

Seems more likely to me that a bunch of people obsessed with "expose" type videos have twisted a casual conversation into a political piece. We've seen it done so many times by now that you'd think most people would be immune by now, but looks like it still works very well indeed.