It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
That hits home, do you mind if I use that image?
That image is fair game, it is in the public domain. archive.org...
I took a screenshot of this old US gov propaganda film from 1949. Definitely go watch this old video. I added the ATS logo in the middle. If you have experience with graphic programs you could make a nicer version of it. I'd encourage you to make your own version of it so that nobody accuses *you* of being *my* sock puppet!!! LOL!!
A lot of confused trolls use these techniques because they are not aware they are spreading pure propaganda. Trolls will continue to use these techniques even after you call them out on it using this 60+ year old training film for high schools.
Super trolls are soooo good at what they do and can use 6 or 7 techniques in a single post. and get about 50 stars for doing it. Watch out for those!edit on 2/22/2014 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)
Basically a bunch of scientists got trolled online by some teenagers and decided to write up a paper using science speak to retaliate against them. Anyone who believes this paper is being trolled.
In a survey conducted by the group of psychologists, people who partake in so-called trolling online showed signs of sadism, psychopathy, and were Machiavellian in their manipulation of others and their disregard for morality.
The results were both surprising and disturbing. Uncivil comments not only polarized readers, but they often changed a participant’s interpretation of the news story itself.
In the civil group, those who initially did or did not support the technology — whom we identified with preliminary survey questions — continued to feel the same way after reading the comments. Those exposed to rude comments, however, ended up with a much more polarized understanding of the risks connected with the technology.
Simply including an ad hominem attack in a reader comment was enough to make study participants think the downside of the reported technology was greater than they’d previously thought.