Do You Think Posters Should Have the Right to Post Satire as Truth on Soda Head?

by joseph digristina Posted 2012/06/26 02:00:47

27 votes
Read all 47 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	This was an outrage.	4 votes	15%
	Lying is fair game,no matter how outrageous.	3 votes	11%
	None of the above	20 votes	74%

Two articles were recently published on Soda Head,one declaring that Obama's house in Chicago had been foreclosed upon. It was a satire piece from a website known for comedy. But the poster allowed people to assume it was true. The same poster did this with another article. Soda Head refused to remove the two outrageous lies. Is this fair or an outrage?

Add a comment above

ProudProgressive 2012/06/26 02:13:51

None of the above

+7
When I post satirical articles I always identify them as such, and I think it's proper that anyone else do the same. However, if someone posts a satire and claims it to be true they are subject to all the people who will post and demonstrate that the post shouldn't be taken seriously. Anyone who takes anything posted on SH as gospel is in for some rude awakenings.
>> See Replies

More polls by joseph digristina

jubil8 BN-0 PON 2012/06/27 05:02:27

None of the above

Sometimes people post satire not knowing it's satire. It's not an outrage -- it's funny. And they're not lying because they believe it.

Last year someone posted an article from The Onion with the URL, and several people reacted like it was for real. The poster said she thought EVERYONE would see the URL and realize it was a friggin' joke!

I think when this happens you should enjoy your laugh. :)

reply
CAROLYN NTARWNJBS 2012/06/26 23:15:24

None of the above

+1
Satire can be funny and should be stated as such when posting. Blatant,unfactual lies are another thing and SH is breeding ground for for those blogs.

reply
Bastion 2012/06/26 19:54:41

Lying is fair game,no matter how outrageous.

+1
Fox News does it all the time, why not SH?

reply
DFA 2012/06/26 19:53:04

None of the above

Satire is fine. It's the people who don't get it that are at a loss.

reply
Warren - Novus Ordo Seclorum 2012/06/26 17:50:36

None of the above

+3
I think satire is a great way to sort out the idiots who will believe anything they read as long as it conforms to their personal biases.

reply
WankerBait 2012/06/26 15:49:58

None of the above

+2
I think satire should be welcomed and encouraged by all. I personally love it. However, I also think posting articles that are blatantly fallacious and are intended to misinform, mislead, or impugn should be picked apart, exposed, and ridiculed by all. Of course here on SH, the ideological groupings tend to stick together even when exposed for posting such blather...

reply
Melizmatic 2012/06/26 15:36:09

None of the above

+3
What's "fair"? No such thing exists on this site.

And I think that anyone who arbitrarily believes anything they read on the web without verifying it with reputable sources is very naive.

Consider the source, and dont take the stuff posted here too seriously; its just an entertainment website, after all...

reply
flyingseaturtle BN 2012/06/26 14:44:04 (edited)

None of the above

+1
If someone writes satire and admits to it in the same post isn't lying. If they don't admit to satire then they have to face the consequences.

reply
socokid 2012/06/26 14:34:42

Lying is fair game,no matter how outrageous.

+1
I do not like it, as I understand too many do not apply any hint critical thought when ingesting ANYthing, but it is up to the reader to apply due diligence, especially on SodaHead.

If you are unable to do a quick google search to verify a claim, that is your fault. When I find one of these "questions", I call them out on it. All you can really do.

reply
☆ElenaDiamond☆ 2012/06/26 14:28:00

None of the above

+1
I think if people are too dumb to recognize satire, then perhaps it is their own fault if they are deceived.

reply
brutusin~ Proud Apetheist 2012/06/26 14:26:44

This was an outrage.

Stupid Sodahead, chose lying is fair game.

reply
Tresa 2012/06/26 13:56:46

None of the above

+2
I believe the poster knew it was false but didn't care because of their hatred for Obama. Even if they succeeded in convincing just one person that it was true then it was mission accomplished.
I have no sympathy for people who fall for this type of bs, you're already on the computer how hard is it to confirm some of these tall tales (would out right lies have been to harsh) for yourself. Letting yourself be used for another persons folly would be beneath most people. But this is SH and anything goes, especially if it's anti Obama.

reply
Christy 2012/06/26 13:33:44

None of the above

+1
While I personally detest willful ignorance, I think the idiocy should stand. If someone wants to be stupid badly enough, sometimes the best thing you can do is just let them. Enough people pointed out that it was satire, that it was not truthful, and the poster stubbornly stood by his/her ignorant assumptions. I say leave it for all to see.

reply
Maynard 2012/06/26 12:16:21

None of the above

SEEN THEM,

As a Conservatives, I spoke out and called them WRONG.

Is there ONE liberal out there who can admit that Palin never said she could

SEE RUSSIA FROM HER PORCH?

Even though that was on a COMEDY SHOW, libs still BELIEVED IT and at the same time I proved your entire premise WRONG on this one.

CONSERVATIVE VICTORY ONCE AGAIN, DEFINED.

reply
Christy to Maynard 2012/06/26 13:29:11

+3
I'm liberal, and I know that she did not state that she could see Russia from her house/porch/back yard. Her actual quote was, "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."

What premise did you prove wrong?

reply
Maynard to Christy 2012/06/27 11:31:36

That you are unlike most liberals, Thanks very much.

In YOUR mind, are YOU saying that no liberal believes it?

reply
Tresa to Maynard 2012/06/26 13:44:14

+3
I know she didn't say she could see Russia from her porch but that doesn't make her factual statement any less dippy. Being able to see Russia from an island in Alaska doesn't add any stars to your foreign policy resume which is what she was being ask about.

reply
Maynard to Tresa 2012/06/27 11:33:06

Compare being Gov of Alaska. Dealing with Russia and trade is more international than say, Gov of landlocked Arkansas and Clinton at the time.

reply
Tresa to Maynard 2012/06/27 15:28:31

+1
Then maybe she should have pointed that out instead of the answer she gave which made her sound like a ditz.

reply
Josh Robinson 2012/06/26 11:51:36

None of the above

Freedom of speech/press... Even hate speech and propaganda are protected under the constitution. It's up to the courts to decide what was criminal or not so don't ask me for that answer.

reply
ServantOfAllah 2012/06/26 10:58:25

Lying is fair game,no matter how outrageous.

+2
People should say whatever they want. If the right wingers are dumb enough to fall for it, so be it.

reply
Josh Ro... to Servant... 2012/06/26 11:57:51

+2
What about left-wingers and middle-wingers and winger-wingers winger winger winger winger winger winger... I get sick of the partisan derogatory remarks. They are pointless and only service to inflame and ridicule. You're awesome Fox but the left-right crap is something I will never give in to and don't acknowledge.

reply
Servant... to Josh Ro... 2012/06/26 12:04:31

+4
All I know is, when a nutty right winger posts some BS email, a hundred other nuts show up to rant about it and usually not ONE of them has the sense to fact check. That's all I'm saying. Plus it's frustrating when I'm blocked because I can't even say something about it. They live in an echo chamber, like the ones in their empty heads.

reply
Josh Ro... to Servant... 2012/06/26 14:31:05

+1
To say I find it just discouraging is to liken a tidal wave to moisture..

reply
Servant... to Josh Ro... 2012/06/26 20:56:09

+1
Yes, it is discouraging. It doesn't give me much faith in people.

reply
CAROLYN... to Servant... 2012/06/26 23:04:59

+1
(nodding ,yes!)

reply
Warren ... to Josh Ro... 2012/06/26 17:53:55

+1
He has no obligation to be fair and balanced when the facts are on his side. As it should be.

reply
Skeptikat 2012/06/26 06:04:11
flaca BN-0 2012/06/26 03:32:10

This was an outrage.

+5
Sodahead has a few people who do this. They are not interested in truth or even neutrality. They hate Obama (for no specified reason) and scour the internet into the wee hours looking for stuff to defame him. Whether it's true or not, they don't care, because they actually don't care about their own reputations. But we all know who they are.

reply
Charles Braley 2012/06/26 03:26:03

None of the above

WHy not? Isn't it an expression of free speech?

reply
joseph ... to Charles... 2012/06/26 05:29:42

+2
Lying? Is yelling fire in a theater that's not burning free speech?

reply
Josh Ro... to joseph ... 2012/06/30 11:34:40

That is a kin to the bomb on airplane thing... It's inciting riot/fear and is a crime.

reply
joseph ... to Josh Ro... 2012/07/01 01:33:15

Lible, slander are both subject to fines and civil penalties but when did that ever disturb a conservative or a libertarian?

reply
Rebel Yell 2012/06/26 03:13:20

None of the above

+2
I saw that. For all I know, the person who posted it may have believed it to be true. There have been some other crazy posts on this forum, and they weren't intended to be satirical or a joke.

But even people with limited sense would know the President would not be sneaking around his house trying to jimmy the locks . LOL... what would the Secret Service be doing? Holding the flashlights ?

reply
Roger47 2012/06/26 02:57:35

None of the above

+1
I wish there were a link to see how it was portrayed. Sometimes satire is so obvious there is no need to label it as such. On the other hand, there are clearly people here on SH who will believe absolutely anything that fits with their preconceived beliefs. No doubt they will continue to believe President Obama had his house foreclosed until the day they die. For them, labeling it as satire would probably make no difference.

reply
joseph ... to Roger47 2012/06/26 03:13:59 (edited)

+2
It stated plainly it was satire, but even after being informed several times,the poster insisted it was true. Then when they could no longer could do that she started saying she wouldn't be surprised if it were true. She knew damned well it wasn't true because she posted another article the same night that again was parody and AGAIN failed to point it out.

reply
Tinka123 2012/06/26 02:54:23

None of the above

+1
Who decides what constitutes truth? If the people reading lies refuse to pursue the truth, how are we to know those deciding what does or does not constitute "truth" will better gauge "truth?"

reply
joseph ... to Tinka123 2012/06/26 03:18:37

Either a house was foreclosed on or not . This isn't Plato for Christ's sake.

reply
Tinka123 to joseph ... 2012/06/26 03:31:06

+1
The question was should or should not people "have the right to post satire" as truth?

Of course people have the right to post satire, and people also have the right to research what they read. Whether or not they do is entirely up to them.

reply
joseph ... to Tinka123 2012/06/26 05:30:42

That's just pathetically silly nonsense.

reply