If you look at the signs, there was a black man concerned with the identitarian nature of Black Lives Matter. Are you trying to tell me that he's bigoted? Rather, I think he's concerned with bigotry masquerading as activism.

aside from the fact that the person who asked him to "bless" the statue

Again, this is weak "guilt by association." I have no idea if that other party is a bigot or not. It doesn't matter. Again, it's narrative generation, with the purpose of effective silencing by tarring.

Silicon Valley is largely encased in a bubble produced by and consisting of accusation, name calling, and narrative pushing. The purpose of this is to gain the power to demonize and silence people. The devious thing about it, is that more outrage is generated when the accusations are false, and that fuels more noise and breaks down discourse even further.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

sure, if you say so, dude.

In history, there have been many examples of arrogant groups who achieved economic success and power, became arrogant, and got trapped in bubbles of perception.

http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-t...

They all had disparaging names for outsiders/underlings and thought of themselves as "betters." Most of the time, they thought of themselves as benevolent and benefactors. History is pretty clear about the lessons when those groups start imposing their misguided will on the people.

"Paint part of a picture," Is just another way of saying "Narrative."

To me, it's more telling that your best, leading example of a place where the media got its facts wrong is Shiva Ayyadurai is also telling

So it doesn't matter that they got the facts wrong, because the people they are getting the facts wrong about are "bad" people. Sorry, but that's morally bankrupt. That's the classic moral stance to justify propaganda. Who in the past took actions against people they thought were generally bad, facts be damned? You appear to be in an epistemological calamity. You seem to be trapped in a bubble, where proof invalidating the bubble is sequestered through unsupported narratives.

also paints part of a picture (not one I've described on the thread so far, just to be clear)

So then you threaten to tar me by association as well? Again, it's this pushing of a narrative with no proof.

(Just to be clear, all identitarians are in the wrong. All politics by violence is bad. All politics by intimidation is equally bad, as is disdain for facts and the truth.)

As you've no doubt surmised: not many people are interested in following you down "Hard News Network" video rabbit holes, for the same reason that even though the big-bad-scary-media reports it to be so, we're also not all that interested in what Alex Jones has to say about the Sandy Hook victims or the effectiveness of vaccines.

As I said, the picture you're painting of yourself is not the same picture Shiva Ayyadurai has painted of himself.

But I can sum both up as: "play stupid games, win stupid prizes".

I wouldn't disagree with that. None of that is really relevant, however.

You say "best." It's just one example. You are implicitly admitting that it is an example of where the mainstream media got the facts wrong:

a BuzzFeed listicle-grade story that is itself at pains to point out that the (very few) attendees of an anti-left demonstration in Boston were not all white supremacists.

Furthermore you are also admitting that the mainstream media narrative ran 180 degrees counter to the truth.

"Dr. SHIVA Ayyadurai,PhD(M.I.T.) Inventor of Email"

Then you cover it up by spinning a narrative. None of that is relevant. Also, thanks for demonstrating the mechanism of pushing narrative once again.

As I said, the picture you're painting of yourself is not the same picture Shiva Ayyadurai has painted of himself.

The point is not to convince you. The purpose for me is for 3rd party readers to see. So long as someone speaks out against the narratives, other dissidents will see that someone, somewhere understands.

But in the interest of hope, please pay attention to exactly what it is that you are saying. You have admitted that 1) the mainstream media got the facts wrong, 2) the media narrative was pushing in a deceptive direction in the opposite direction from the facts, and 3) nothing of the factual accuracy of the media, or the fidelity of its pushed narrative matters to you because the targeted people are reprehensibles.

Isn't this the attitude of every arrogant, out of touch elite, unknowingly doing injustice in history, ever? In what moral universe, is it alright that the news sources are so wildly wrong, and the narrative is so contrary to the truth, but it's alright because the subjects are so disliked? I know of extra-legal organizations from just a few decades back who didn't care too much about who exactly was guilty of what, or the facts, just that the people they were acting against were thought of as "reprehensibles" in their world view and also had the "correct" external attributes to be their appropriate targets -- in short, to fit their narratives. I've had such actions taken against me, personally, by such people. Such actions are particularly unjust, at root precisely because of the epistemological disconnect. When I engage in such discussions here, it's this very disconnect which most strongly motivates me.

Please pay attention that you are taking, in principle, such a stance. If your attitude is at all representative of SV CEOs in general, then that doesn't bode well for society at all.