Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 10:02:53 AM

OMG, he had notes about what to say in his Senate hearing.  He must be an idiot like Trump, right?

Name:	lakngulf -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 11:44:10 AM

I was on a 10 hour road trip yesterday and listened to a LOT of the "testimony"  (you do know that he was not under oath, right?)  It was hilarious to hear Z talk out of both sides of his mouth.  I was only listening on radio and could not see him but knew that he was "reading" an answer.  Congressman asks question:  Z responds "So....and then had his three points, three categories, three angles (oh wait, that might be infringement on Laura)" 

It was humorous to me. 

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 7:23:39 PM

He was asked to speak to Congress, and did so voluntarily.  I'm sure he had prep for his meeting with Congress and it sounds to me like he handled it well.  I personally think the hullaballo about FB is a tempest in a teapot.  I'm speaking as someone who has had their personal data mined and exposed multiple times (twice when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked and that was a lot more sensitive than anything FB knows about me).  My feeling is that anytime you are part of any kind of electronic base, you are vulnerable.  And I woud never be influenced by something on FB in terms of who I would vote for.  

Name:	Casey -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 9:08:31 PM

Hound, I agree with you. I think he did quite well. I'm very surprised that some people are shocked that their personal preferences have been used to target ads to them. Are they that uninformed that it came as a surprise? I suppose so. As far as you being influenced to vote by something you saw on Facebook, I'm sure you wouldn't have been. But I remember seeing..on Facebook..you know, the 'trending' on the right side of the Facebook page...that the Pope was endorsing Trump. WHAT????? So, of course, I checked a number of sites and, of course, he clearly was not. But you know, even from reading this forum, a lot of people just read something once and don't go any further to check the veracity of what they read. When Obama was running for office, I got so many emails that were filled with info that absolutely was not true, and they were forwarded to me and 800 of the sender's closest friends. The sender never checked to see if there was any truth to the emails...just hit the 'forward' button because the sender (or forwarder) wanted to believe it true (althought it absolutely  wasn't). So, no, you would not have been influenced, but it's hard to say how many were.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 9:27:25 PM

I guess it is possible that some younger people were influenced, but then, they would not have voted for Trump under any circumstances.  Yes, I remember the rumor and half truths that got forwarded to me when Obama was running.  I voted for Obama twice, once because I wanted to believe in hope and change and the other time because the opposing candidate was someone that I did not trust.  

Name:	Casey -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/11/2018 9:52:58 PM

Hound, I don't agree with you. I think younger people are much more savvy at figuring out what is true and what is not. They have been raised with the internet and know that on it, anyone can find something that one wants to believe. I think it's us 'old fogies' who believe what we read...after all, when we were reared, we all heard basically the same news (NBC, CBS, ABC) and it was news, not opinion. And we pretty much believed what we were told by our politicans. So I think we seniors get sucked into believing whatever we read or are sent by email. My grandkids are much more clever at scoping out facts. It amazes me that my generation (seniors) are so very gullible but I do understand why. But it's too bad.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Proof of your theory
Date:	4/12/2018 6:14:16 AM

A majority of them belive in "global climate change" so obviously they can root out the truth and "facts".

Name:	Casey -	Reply
Subject:	Proof of your theory
Date:	4/12/2018 8:00:40 AM

Many younger people have grown up with the science that supports climate change. It's us 'old fogies' that think we know more than the huge majority of scientists.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Proof of your theory
Date:	4/12/2018 8:52:01 AM

Dont see too many old people eating tide pods or snorting condoms....

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/12/2018 1:26:18 PM

Calling the networks "news" is more than a bit naive.  The networks were never unbiased arbiters of truth, at least not since the 1960's.  I can cite many examples but the one that stands out for me was the coverage of the Vietnam war in general and the Tet Offensive in particular.  The media turned a devastating defeat of the Viet Cong into a victory in the minds of the American people.  And it has only gotten worse since then, especially after the media drove Nixon out of office.  90% of journalism students don't enter that profession to report the news, they do so to change the world.  And they are overwhelmingly progressive as are journalism schools.

I also think your characterization of older adults as brain dead rubes is dead wrong.  There is no doubt that the advent of the alternative media has created an echo chamber where everyone seeks news according to their confirmation bias.  But this is a bipartisan development.  We have access to more news and news from more perspectives than ever before.  Frankly leftists resent that because they wanted to maintain their monopoly on the news and no longer do.  Ask any good leftist and they will tell you the mainstream media (print and TV) is middle of the road, which is laughable.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Proof of your theory
Date:	4/12/2018 1:31:28 PM

There you go again misrepresenting just one of many areas of disagreement.  All scientists believe in climate change, or at least they should since the evidence is overwhelming.  It always has and always will change regardless of what we do.  What many scientists understand, including me, is that anthropogenic climate change is very much open to debate and there are plenty of valid, scientifically sound reasons to remain unconvinced.  Younger people, as a result of decades of indoctrination, have lost the ability to think critically and understand that ACC is unproven and very problematic given the evidence.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	According to Goofy Zuckerberg is an idiot
Date:	4/15/2018 11:58:41 AM

I don't know Casey, I see an awful lot of group think among young people today.  I have a niece in college and I read postings by her and her friends and it seems to me that they all think the same.  Even when I was in HS in the early 70s, we were all against the Viet Nam war, but I'm not sure we truly understood what the war was really about.  We were fed the domino theory - which in a way, is much like what we are fed about ISIS - they if we don't stop them "over there", they will next be on our doorstop.  

And I don't see a lot of independent thinking about Trump.  Because people don't like his personality, they are unable to actually acknowledge some of the good things he has done.  There is a real tendency in this country to believe that more regulation is a good thing.  I have seen regulation and legislation put into place only on the fear of what might happen, if people and/or companies are left to their own devices.  Even Mark Zuckerberg is thinking that maybe his industry needs more oversight and regulation, when really what we need is to think more critically and independently.  I don't go on FB searching for answers - I only go there to keep in touch with my far flung friends.  And even Wickipedia isn't really reliable, as it is written by self proclaimed experts.  

Most people just don't have the commitment to read scholarly books on a subject and from there derive our own thoughts. It's much easier to pick up our "facts" from instragram, tweets and articles and form opinions from there.  And most people are reading and agreeing with that they already think, regardless of the facts.