Um, no. You have a group of people who are making a statement based upon evidence external to the group. That's not an echo chamber. Unless, as Packard has suggested, you are using a different definition of group think and echo chamber. The fact that we arrive at the same conclusions does not automatically mean that we are engaged in group think. I think the sky is blue. I wonder how many will agree with me. If most at Wordforge agree with me (I say most because a few here think it's green), will that be a demonstration of an echo chamber or a group think process? Or might it mean that the sky is empirically blue?
[action=garamet]waits for someone to point out that the sky isn't really blue; it just appears that way. [/action]
Um, yeah. And you better not be quoting my posts just to get rep from your fellow echo chamber members!
Maybe not self-righteous, but I'm reminded of someone who isn't comfortable with their sexuality who has to constantly remind others how straight they are.
Dude... People shouldn't disagree on facts because facts are... well, facts. I try to respect all opinions but when we disagree on facts then is it my fault? We can have different approaches as to how to solve problems, but we can't even agree on what the problem is!! The Fact Checking outlets have been brutal to Romney and the GOP this election cycle because they're getting agenda-based news. The University of Maryland among others has done studies time after time and event after event that show that Fox News Channel watchers and Right Wing radio listeners were consistantly the most misinformed people of all media outlets. For the record, NPR and PBS consumers were the most informed. This last election has shown that the GOP are in their own little feedback loop and that their information was totally off, but do you think they are going to hold the people accountable for the misinformation? I don't think so. Like I said, when I hear news on MSNBC that seems to support democrats, I double check it. I have been burned by Maddow before, so I continue to double check her work, but she's better than most. If you take issue with the accuracy of anything in the post I put here from MaddowBlog then have at it. What's Allen West doing right now?
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/10/foxs_misinformation_effect/ http://www.alternet.org/story/153214/7_things_fox_viewers_are_wildly_misinformed_about Google any of the following terms: Fox News, PIPA, SOPA, MEdia MAtters Fact Check, Misinformation
I think I will sit here and jerk off to the boobies shown on Alphaman's avatar. I do like boobies. fap:
Conservative media. It's all about Rupert Murdoch using shiny objects to lead news people into running around in circles chattering to themselves, oblivious to outside reality. The real goal is to get a laugh when the idiots hurt themselves rushing in because they're mesmerized by the shiny object the news folks are playing with.
Here's an interesting snippet I just found: AtlanticWire Apparently even the candidates themselves are caught up in their own media storm.
This means we really, really dodged the bullet, even more so than I thought before. That's spectacularly disqualifying incompetence on Romney's part, the kind that should make "President Romney" every bit as scary a phrase as "President Palin" or "President Limbaugh." It's time for everyone to face the fact that Romney just isn't very bright at all. When it comes down to it, Romney's pretty fucking stupid.
I doth protest too much? Or are you using homosexuality as an insult? If it's the former, I'm a secret partisan! If it's the latter, you're a bigot! Either way you're on record stating that I'm not self-righteous.
So no, you are not willing to consider you're an echo-chamber member, nor that those who disagree with you aren't necessarily misinformed. Okay, fair enough.
I picture you running around in circles while you post these things, at ever higher speeds and shorter diameters, waving your index finger like an indignant metronome on the move.