A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
This has been known for years (decades?): setting black text against a black background in a PDF doesn't eliminate the text in the PDF. Duh...
The only reason why this is still an idiotic mistake made by public officials is because public officials are idiots.
The more I read about what's in some of these files (e.g. a report about Trump being present while a 13yo rape victim's newborn baby was thrown into lake Michigan), the more I'm starting to think it was intentional.
The people who had to go through this shit to redact it might be fascist pieces of shit, but they're still ostensibly in fields at least somewhat related to law enforcement. Having to read shit like that, and then be complicit in covering it up... I dunno.
the more I’m starting to think it was intentional
That's a mistake. Go by Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
It wouldn’t be malice, it would be altruism
The important thing is "adequately". Sometimes the reality can make it improbable.
Hanlon's razor is and has always been bullshit.
It's always held true for me. Malice - or forethought - require intelligence, something that's in much shorter supply than anybody would believe.
Stupid usually explains most everything adequately.
Is it, though? Has the system been keeping us down, or are the ppl in charge just stupid and greedy? Assigning intent makes the unfairness sting less.
Has the system been keeping us down, or are the ppl in charge just stupid and greedy?
This is a false choice, it's both. Not all of them are (or were) stupid. But the system is intentionally like this because people are greedy. For money and power.
Oh, my apologies.
I didn't realize you were being intractable.
What? I thought we were having a respectful discussion. My bad I guess I misread the situation
Well, I felt you were drawing relevance away from the initial intent of the quoted maxim. Regardless, looks like I might have overreacted. Let's just chalk this up to internet comments.
That's true of many rules/razors... I wonder if there's a rule/razor about not putting too much faith in things like murphys law and occams razor.
It basically just means “be kind“
You may never have heard of the AAAA, the Advertisers Against Advertising Alliance..
Imagine a cigarette-company wants some advertising-work done..
Imagine that you're dead set against cigarette-companies, but they don't know that..
Imagine getting the contract, & doing advertising-design for them, where they get an advertising-campaign which to them looks good, but .. doesn't work on people..
Imagine that that is exactly what you had intended..
No card-carrying, no meetings, no visible-connections: only independent people contributing independently.
( I suspect that the drugstore "Life" brand, at Shopper's Drug Mart was done by a member of the AAAA: NOBODY with health-sense would buy that shit, as a result of the campaign they had, years ago, when I lived in a city )
Now remap it from AAAA to someone ordered to redact evil, to protect the regime against accountability..
Imagine you know exactly that this highlighting-with-black won't work..
Imagine that this is exactly why you use the method: to protect accountability, in a dying-empire's deathspasms..
It then becomes possible to "do one's job" & be complicit within the regime ( but notice those falsifying-quotes! ),
while one protects integrity, Justice, & accountability, by doing one's "job" in a way which enables actual-Journalism, should there be any left, to dig-in..
Beauty, eh?
_ /\ _
Sooo, malicious compliance?
My favorite
Hold. What. Where do I find this, please?
I’ve read of the copy/paste unredacting but I’ve yet to read them.
There’s a link in the article directly to the tip report.
Man, the contortions that editor had to go through to get to that tame headline are spectacular. The tip says that he raped a pregnant 14 year old then oversaw the murder of her newborn baby.
Our media has failed us completely
I saw this yesterday (read the tip pdf, not the article), but am having a hard time believing this. Sounds a bit far fetched
Yeah… after finding out the Nasser letter was fake…
Yeah this more feels like something else though - tip came through 2020 at peak Epstein hype craze, names multiple high profile individuals in an absurdly grotesque crime, that even if true, they'd likely have "people" for these kinds of clean ups, just doesn't pass the smell test for me.
Also with the amount of redactions in trump related files this feels like something they "feed" us so that we pull the string until they can prove its a fake to discredit us
Thank you. My default is to assume crazy shit in this timeline is true but some of these sound so fantastical.
Even if the text is removed, if the font is a proportional one, the very exact dimensions of any removed text plus knowledge of stuff like kerning can reveal the text.
that is thousands of FBI man hours wasted for you lol
Will the get tax credits for that ?
As pointed out in the article, how do we deal with documents from people filling the blanks with whatever they want and claim they "unredacted" it?
The documents are public and the unredacters are documenting what they’re doing to reveal the text.
If they tell you how they did it, you can just do the same thing to the file and see for yourself.
By following the law that required this release of files, which includes things like limiting redactions to specific topics, accompanying the redactions with explanations as to their content, and retaining the unredacted versions for congressional inspection.
They are deliberately creating doubt and confusion to avoid accountability.
Because that's not how Ctrl+C works.