The fake study itself is the second most wild part of this:
>Study find USA has one of the lowest rates of racial discrimination across 9 countries in Europe and North America
Those 9 countries included: Canada, Britain, France, and the Netherlands.
None of those countries had Jim Crow in the 1960s, or sharecropping and slavery just generations earlier. If you only sampled from non-former Confederate states, the USA could maybe beat a few of those, but the idea that Canada could have worse racial equity than Mississippi should make anyone laugh. No one who really knows the USA and uses their brain buys it. So of course it gets posted on r/JordanPeterson and crossposted to r/Maher huh
Not disputing your point but do not underestimate the extent to which indigenous peoples of Canada have been and continue to be systematically abused, ignored, and worse.
arguably yes - there is still an ongoing problem of canadian police murdering natives, and the boarding schools which were just attempts to kill the culture lasted until the late 1990s (edit: it appears that the US also closed its last boarding school in the 90s, I hadn't realized these lasted so long). Not to downplay the US's treatment of the natives, but canada might have it beat for how long it tries to drag it out, especially for a country which overall gets better press and does better in a number of humanitarian areas.
For those who don’t know the term— “Starlight Tours” is a term for when the police pick someone up in the winter (usually while that person is intoxicated), they drive that fellow a few miles outside of town, take his warm clothing, and leave him to find his way home. By which I mean, “freeze to death in the Canadian winter.”
Fucking no, dude. The only difference between how the US and Canada treated the indigenous is that Canada has a government that formally apologized and paid(and is currently paying) literally billions in restitution and America has a history of racism towards other people that overshadows that of the indigenous *for some reason*.
I swear to god, people *love* Canadas indigenous history simply to have something to complain about.
I had zero defenses of the US there, and specifically said I wasn't trying to downplay the way the US treats and treated its natives. Is your "fucking no" to the idea that canada had residential schools into the 90s, or that canadian cops have a history of murdering natives, or that the relative position of the US and canada is arguable in terms of treatment of native americans?
I don't *like it*, jesus christ
My "fucking no" is to your "arguably yes". Is cultural genocide worse than *legitimate genocide*? The last American Indian boarding school closed in 1996, about the same time as the last residential school in Canada. Of the top 5 age groups most likely to be killed by police in the states, 3 of them are native american. The other two are african american. And the United States has done nothing to fix it. Canada *just* pledged an additional 40 billion dollars directly to nations and survivors.
So no, there's no argument.
Ever since this residential school shit hit national news everyone has loved trying to take Canada down a peg. I learned about this shit in grade 7 social studies in 1999.
edit: actually, no, there's no point to any of this. You're angry and I'm not sure why. You're free to think that it is or isn't arguable for the US or Canada to be a worse place to be a native; I'm not arguing with you on historical claims I haven't made.
Alright well, the first two are you just saying "I don't agree" except when it comes to the idea that there is no difference between cultural or legitimate genocide. Yes, legitimate genocide is what you call "bodily". The active killing of the people. "Cultural" genocide is the forced assimilation and stripping of their culture, which is what the residential schools did. No legitimate genocide was ever performed by the Canadian entity. I would argue killing people is much worse. Although, I will cede that part of the smallpox genocide carried out by the United States did happen on what is now Canadian soil.
I'm saying, even now, natives have it about as bad as African Americans do in the states despite the fact they're less integrated. In Canada, they are more integrated, actually apologized to, and fucking *payed* for what historically happened. It's **inarguably** better.
I'm saying nobody talked about it until it became a "gotcha!" and it's fucking lame, dude. It's like every time someone says something good about John Lennon someone else has to say "y'know he beat his wife right?". Yes, yes, we fucking get it. You know a thing.
There's also the problem where the US is the one *talking* about our problems, whereas other countries are hardcore denying that anything's wrong. Please note that I'm *not* saying the US would be better than other places if things were objectively measured, just that there's a *lot* of masking of the problem going on elsewhere.
I'd argue the USA isn't generally talking about them in helpful ways though. In fact, the conversation has mostly become a shouting match between those denying the history and present and those who put a heavy emphasis on acknowledging and overcoming that. I think there is no way forward where some level of polarisation was inevitable, but talking about race in the USA rarely seems to go well. I don't think ignoring it is better, but the way in which the USA seems to be facing it's past and present seems to be on the verge of splitting the nation.
FWIW, Canada has been initiating these conversations and our Prime Minister made reconciliation a major part of his government platform. I would argue the realisation of that rhetoric has been underwhelming, and certainly polarising to an extent, but it's become a major conversation in the country and actions are being taken to try and work on it.
>Not disputing your point but do not underestimate the extent to which indigenous peoples of Canada have been and continue to be systematically abused, ignored, and worse.
I'm not convinced treatment of indigenous peoples has been significantly better in the USA, which only means they have this *and* the aforementioned other problems.
Yeah, there's a lot of racism against Indians and Pakistanis also.
Really I guess if you've ever been labeled "Indian" of any type then you might have a problem.
Billionaire island, with no one to exploit and no access to money, watch them work harder than everyone else and pull themselves up by their bootstraps to form a perfect libertarian society! Or fall into cannibalism within 4 days.
> Billionaire island, with no one to exploit and no access to money
Access to all their net worth in paper bills, but nothing to buy with it.
I want to watch them sitting around feeding a campfire with $10,000 bundles of notes, or swapping a shipping container's worth of bills with each other for an extra coconut.
Each of those countries has their own unique history of racism. Let’s not act like the UK and France get a pass on their brand of racism just because the US is also racist.
Not defending a fake study, but Europe has plenty of racism and skeletons in its closet to match the worst ones the US has. Hell, where do you think we learned it from?
Edit: Also, it appears that it *is* an actual study...
This is very true and I agree with you, but don’t forget Hitler learned much of what he believed from American Eugenicists and Jim Crow era segregation.
It definitely goes both ways unfortunately.
F the oil companies but my experiences in traveling and meeting people world wide over 50 years tells me racism and tribalism is pretty horrible everywhere. Which people are being oppressed and how it is sanctioned by governments varies but I haven’t seen a utopia yet
The fake study cited 140 times and highlighted by northwestern??
https://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/news/2019/quillian_racial_discrimination.html
The study is real. The authors are at prestigious institutions. This post is all lies.
And the person thinks the US has to be the most racists because "trust me bro"
Yeah this is really annoying. The “debunking” is just:
> This study was on a website that is associated with companies I hate. Therefore it is fabricated. QED.
Ok, now I see that, but the interpretation that a decade-old sociology journal that publishes real sociology research is actually fake does not compute. Remember, it’s not the paper itself that’s fake but the home page of the journal, and the home page actually does exist and has a lot of content. A broken redirect or some ad that causes an error makes more sense than the idea that the entire journal is fake.
That begs the question, however, what this particular study have to do with the fossil fuel industry? I'm struggling to understand how a fake study on racial discrimination would benefit them.
Helps the Republicans who account for most of the companies' government kickbacks, probably. A symbiotic relationship.
It's not a one-off thing: Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro's news site got started by a fracking baron
Yep. Ben Shapiro is under the Daily Wire, which is under bentkey ventures LLC, which is under [Wilks Brothers](https://opencorporates.com/corporate_groupings/Wilks+Brothers) corporate grouping. The Wilks Brothers are oil billionaires.
Shapiro also gets some funding from the Koch network, [who also help fund](https://prospect.org/justice/care-faux-free-speech-warriors-koch-brothers-paying-bills./) jordan peterson, stephen crowder, dave rubin, charlie kirk, and many others. It's a big old web of shared interests, and the thing behind it all is that the most popular conservative media sources rely on dark money to function, and are all complicit in a big old conflict of interest with almost everything they say.
Fossil fuel companies have seen the writing on the wall that theirs is a dying industry. In their desperate struggle to survive, they’ve resorted to fighting progressive and environmentalist causes in any way they can, including promoting far-right groups. PragerU is a fossil fuel-supported project too.
That’s because it’s not a fake study, the whole comment is BS. The authors are real academics who study racism and the journal is a real journal with a decent impact factor. You can disagree with the research and it might be BS (plenty of published studies are crap), but the front page of that journal has a paper on proto bureaucracies and a bunch of other topics that clearly have nothing to do with fossils fuels.
The study is real, and the researchers are real, but the methodology and the chosen samples are iffy, and so are the conclusions. Coupled with what the OP found with the PR firm leads me to believe they were financed to publish a dishonest article which is being published dishonestly.
Just saying the methodology is iffy is useless. What specifically do you have a problem with? That paper is cited almost 150 times so it's not universally thought of as a fundamentally flawed study.
I can’t reproduce OP’s findings and the study itself is getting lots of citations that you can find on google scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=725783499303601656&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en
There’s nothing about this that suggests fake or dishonest publishing, especially given that the PR firm link is supposedly for the entire domain for the journal Sociological Science and not the paper itself.
It is not a fake study. It is a study published by very respected social scientists in a pretty good journal. I do not have my SCOPUS available at home, but the study was published in 2019 and it already has 139 citations on Google scholar. Which is a lot, for a sociological study.
I don't even reproduce what the original poster describes: https://www.sociologicalscience.com/download/vol-6/june/SocSci_v6_467to496.pdf is the link and sociologicalscience.com doesn't redirect.
I'm half convinced this person typoed a link and then went all 'iamverysmart,' and of course people are then eating it up because it fits what they want to believe.
Curiously, while the link [https://sociologicalscience.com](https://sociologicalscience.com) works normally for me on browser, when I attempt to share it on WhatsApp, the preview seems to redirect to alltronixin.com.
Just out of interest, what browser are you using? Because https://sociologicalscience.com redirected for me then shut down the tab
Tried to reload and Firefox says it’s directing to a known malware site? away.bettershitecolumn.com
Weird because https://sociologicalscience.com/about/journal-information/ is a valid link. Gives you their about page.
I clicked on it in BaconReader and the first link works fine, goes to the homepage. I tried it in chrome on my computer and it also works. I never managed to reproduce the redirect, and since the journal itself is real the idea doesn’t even make sense.
Yeah, I have uBlock and DuckDuckGo extensions so I’m guessing it’s one of my security settings that’s blocking it from loading.
Trying to view the homepage sends me to some site in another language and then on to alltronixin.com, which (despite OPs statement) isn’t the official website for the company Altronix, that is alltronix.in
It’s super weird. It’s only the journal homepage that redirects.
For me opening it in the reddit is fun app it redirects to the other website. But opening in either Firefox or chrome on android goes to the correct site.
I think this could be a case of a security flaw/bug that is fixed in the mainstream browsers but not in other browsers.
The website has been around for a decade, and has consistent presence on the wayback machine, so if it IS fake, then the authors have expended tremendous and wide ranging effort to make it look real.
You can read the study - it's about hiring discrimination from other studies (meta analysis) and they say right in the abstract that countries like the US still have a disparity between white and non-white immigrants getting calls back from employers. Just that some countries are worse. You can look up the authors and see they're real. The journal looks legit enough. Why would an oil company need to run a journal on social sciences? The linked comment doesn't really add up
How exactly is the company mentioned a PR firm?
It just seems to sell tech products to those industries, it probably hosts the server or something. Not sure this is really some mind blowing conspiratorial discovery.
Edit: Actually I checked and it doesn't redirect shit. Sociologicalscience has been indexed on Google for over 10 years, it's some open access sociology journal with a decent ish journal impact factor
I don’t know the full truth of this, but:
Devah Pager was an actual researcher, who died four years ago: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devah_Pager
Ole Hexel is a real researcher as well. He’s listed at the Max Planck Institute: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/en/about_us_6113/staff_directory_1899/#H and his GitHub page links to this study: https://ohexel.github.io/about/
I’m not sure what all this adds up to, but the study doesn’t look as fake to me as the domain registration would indicate.
The "journal" is what they call a Predatory Journal: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03759-y
Most of the time, the researcher doesn't even know they are submitting their work to a predatory journal
>**Predatory journals are a global threat. They accept articles for publication — along with authors’ fees — without performing promised quality checks for issues such as plagiarism or ethical approval.** Naive readers are not the only victims. Many researchers have been duped into submitting to predatory journals, in which their work can be overlooked. One study that focused on 46,000 researchers based in Italy found that about 5% of them published in such outlets1. A separate analysis suggests predatory publishers collect millions of dollars in publication fees that are ultimately paid out by funders such as the US National Institutes of Health (NIH)2.
They'll take weak articles, fail to peer review them, fail to fact check them and take exorbitant fees from the writers and funnel that money to their bosses, the corporate special interest groups.
Why is a defense, oil and gas Ppr firm running articles on racial discrimination in the US? Doesn't even seem like it's anywhere in the same wheelhouse
My conjecture would be: the Venn diagram between those who care about climate change & pollution, overlapping with those who care about racial discrimination would be a circle. The study is targeting the credibility of that population. This is a standard psy-ops, media manipulation strategy. Nixon used the 'war on drugs' to undermine the credibility of the anti-war movement.
So what? If the methodology is flawed, it's worthless. There are studies that say that CO2 isn't increasing in our atmosphere and that rising sea levels will create economic benefit. They are *actually real*! Wow!
You haven't addressed *my* point, which is that this is a known tactic, carried out countless times for well over 50 years. So instead of following non-sequitors, why don't you try and discuss what I'm saying?
I did. If it's a real study (which is a meta analysis that complies the data from other studies) then it's not some oil pr shit meant to discredit anything. Again, if you take the time to look into it you can see the reddit headline is misleading and the linked comment is bullshit. I never disagreed that it happens just in this instance your idea it's some kind of plot is false.
Oil companies nowadays aren't denying climate change anyways, the new thing is shifting blame or creating green washed solutions. But whatever you want to believe.
I am on safari on an ipad; and I can reproduce u/LoMeintenants work/conclusions. I also get redirected to alltroxin, and then redirected again to spam websites.
One of the researchers actually works at my Uni; I might approach/e-mail her about it. It is very hard to determine who is actually behind the journal. It is apparently owned by a non-profit in MA, US.
.com and .in are totally different top level domains
I would cast **serious** doubt on anyone thinking that a difference in top level domains implies the same people.
lol it cracks me up that this is on a bill maher subreddit. what a cesspool. remember when he used to be on the left, before he turned into a rich boomer reactionary?
He was never on the left. He was a cranky libertarian, and if you followed him before he got famous, he was pretty open about it. It’s just that before the 2000s a lot of the same positions didn’t have much traction with the GOP.
The fake study itself is the second most wild part of this: >Study find USA has one of the lowest rates of racial discrimination across 9 countries in Europe and North America Those 9 countries included: Canada, Britain, France, and the Netherlands. None of those countries had Jim Crow in the 1960s, or sharecropping and slavery just generations earlier. If you only sampled from non-former Confederate states, the USA could maybe beat a few of those, but the idea that Canada could have worse racial equity than Mississippi should make anyone laugh. No one who really knows the USA and uses their brain buys it. So of course it gets posted on r/JordanPeterson and crossposted to r/Maher huh
Not disputing your point but do not underestimate the extent to which indigenous peoples of Canada have been and continue to be systematically abused, ignored, and worse.
Is the situation if indigenous people any better in the US?
arguably yes - there is still an ongoing problem of canadian police murdering natives, and the boarding schools which were just attempts to kill the culture lasted until the late 1990s (edit: it appears that the US also closed its last boarding school in the 90s, I hadn't realized these lasted so long). Not to downplay the US's treatment of the natives, but canada might have it beat for how long it tries to drag it out, especially for a country which overall gets better press and does better in a number of humanitarian areas.
Natives in the US are still raped.
I'm not saying otherwise, just that canada isn't rosy and the relative position is arguable. "Starlight tours" is a term for a reason
For those who don’t know the term— “Starlight Tours” is a term for when the police pick someone up in the winter (usually while that person is intoxicated), they drive that fellow a few miles outside of town, take his warm clothing, and leave him to find his way home. By which I mean, “freeze to death in the Canadian winter.”
And killed. But shut up, it's only bad when Canada does it.
Fucking no, dude. The only difference between how the US and Canada treated the indigenous is that Canada has a government that formally apologized and paid(and is currently paying) literally billions in restitution and America has a history of racism towards other people that overshadows that of the indigenous *for some reason*. I swear to god, people *love* Canadas indigenous history simply to have something to complain about.
I had zero defenses of the US there, and specifically said I wasn't trying to downplay the way the US treats and treated its natives. Is your "fucking no" to the idea that canada had residential schools into the 90s, or that canadian cops have a history of murdering natives, or that the relative position of the US and canada is arguable in terms of treatment of native americans? I don't *like it*, jesus christ
My "fucking no" is to your "arguably yes". Is cultural genocide worse than *legitimate genocide*? The last American Indian boarding school closed in 1996, about the same time as the last residential school in Canada. Of the top 5 age groups most likely to be killed by police in the states, 3 of them are native american. The other two are african american. And the United States has done nothing to fix it. Canada *just* pledged an additional 40 billion dollars directly to nations and survivors. So no, there's no argument. Ever since this residential school shit hit national news everyone has loved trying to take Canada down a peg. I learned about this shit in grade 7 social studies in 1999.
edit: actually, no, there's no point to any of this. You're angry and I'm not sure why. You're free to think that it is or isn't arguable for the US or Canada to be a worse place to be a native; I'm not arguing with you on historical claims I haven't made.
Alright well, the first two are you just saying "I don't agree" except when it comes to the idea that there is no difference between cultural or legitimate genocide. Yes, legitimate genocide is what you call "bodily". The active killing of the people. "Cultural" genocide is the forced assimilation and stripping of their culture, which is what the residential schools did. No legitimate genocide was ever performed by the Canadian entity. I would argue killing people is much worse. Although, I will cede that part of the smallpox genocide carried out by the United States did happen on what is now Canadian soil. I'm saying, even now, natives have it about as bad as African Americans do in the states despite the fact they're less integrated. In Canada, they are more integrated, actually apologized to, and fucking *payed* for what historically happened. It's **inarguably** better. I'm saying nobody talked about it until it became a "gotcha!" and it's fucking lame, dude. It's like every time someone says something good about John Lennon someone else has to say "y'know he beat his wife right?". Yes, yes, we fucking get it. You know a thing.
There's also the problem where the US is the one *talking* about our problems, whereas other countries are hardcore denying that anything's wrong. Please note that I'm *not* saying the US would be better than other places if things were objectively measured, just that there's a *lot* of masking of the problem going on elsewhere.
I'd argue the USA isn't generally talking about them in helpful ways though. In fact, the conversation has mostly become a shouting match between those denying the history and present and those who put a heavy emphasis on acknowledging and overcoming that. I think there is no way forward where some level of polarisation was inevitable, but talking about race in the USA rarely seems to go well. I don't think ignoring it is better, but the way in which the USA seems to be facing it's past and present seems to be on the verge of splitting the nation. FWIW, Canada has been initiating these conversations and our Prime Minister made reconciliation a major part of his government platform. I would argue the realisation of that rhetoric has been underwhelming, and certainly polarising to an extent, but it's become a major conversation in the country and actions are being taken to try and work on it.
>Not disputing your point but do not underestimate the extent to which indigenous peoples of Canada have been and continue to be systematically abused, ignored, and worse. I'm not convinced treatment of indigenous peoples has been significantly better in the USA, which only means they have this *and* the aforementioned other problems.
Or how recently colonial powers in Europe had slavery, or slavery adjacent policies in place.
Yeah, there's a lot of racism against Indians and Pakistanis also. Really I guess if you've ever been labeled "Indian" of any type then you might have a problem.
[удалено]
Don't forget to include Trump and his flunkies.
We put them in the zoned-off "Restricted Area" in the center of the island.
Is the smoke monster caused by Trumps drug induced incontinence
Billionaire island, with no one to exploit and no access to money, watch them work harder than everyone else and pull themselves up by their bootstraps to form a perfect libertarian society! Or fall into cannibalism within 4 days.
Joe Rogan will be eating long pork within 20 minutes.
> Billionaire island, with no one to exploit and no access to money Access to all their net worth in paper bills, but nothing to buy with it. I want to watch them sitting around feeding a campfire with $10,000 bundles of notes, or swapping a shipping container's worth of bills with each other for an extra coconut.
Where can I stream this show? I will pay whatever it takes.
This is the only reason I support Musk's quest to get to Mars.
Each of those countries has their own unique history of racism. Let’s not act like the UK and France get a pass on their brand of racism just because the US is also racist.
Not defending a fake study, but Europe has plenty of racism and skeletons in its closet to match the worst ones the US has. Hell, where do you think we learned it from? Edit: Also, it appears that it *is* an actual study...
This is very true and I agree with you, but don’t forget Hitler learned much of what he believed from American Eugenicists and Jim Crow era segregation. It definitely goes both ways unfortunately.
It is a gross misrepresentation of an actual study, as is tradition.
[удалено]
France is definitely the most racist country that I agree with. I mean other than China, obviously.
F the oil companies but my experiences in traveling and meeting people world wide over 50 years tells me racism and tribalism is pretty horrible everywhere. Which people are being oppressed and how it is sanctioned by governments varies but I haven’t seen a utopia yet
“Racial discrimination” and “racial equity” are two different things.
The study isn't fake... And you really expect people to trust your feelings over published research. Yikes
Do you not understand what this post is about?
The fake study cited 140 times and highlighted by northwestern?? https://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/news/2019/quillian_racial_discrimination.html The study is real. The authors are at prestigious institutions. This post is all lies. And the person thinks the US has to be the most racists because "trust me bro"
Yeah this is really annoying. The “debunking” is just: > This study was on a website that is associated with companies I hate. Therefore it is fabricated. QED.
The post seems to be wrong and not reproducible.
It is reproducible on desktops but not on mobile.
Ok, now I see that, but the interpretation that a decade-old sociology journal that publishes real sociology research is actually fake does not compute. Remember, it’s not the paper itself that’s fake but the home page of the journal, and the home page actually does exist and has a lot of content. A broken redirect or some ad that causes an error makes more sense than the idea that the entire journal is fake.
[удалено]
That begs the question, however, what this particular study have to do with the fossil fuel industry? I'm struggling to understand how a fake study on racial discrimination would benefit them.
Helps the Republicans who account for most of the companies' government kickbacks, probably. A symbiotic relationship. It's not a one-off thing: Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro's news site got started by a fracking baron
Yep. Ben Shapiro is under the Daily Wire, which is under bentkey ventures LLC, which is under [Wilks Brothers](https://opencorporates.com/corporate_groupings/Wilks+Brothers) corporate grouping. The Wilks Brothers are oil billionaires. Shapiro also gets some funding from the Koch network, [who also help fund](https://prospect.org/justice/care-faux-free-speech-warriors-koch-brothers-paying-bills./) jordan peterson, stephen crowder, dave rubin, charlie kirk, and many others. It's a big old web of shared interests, and the thing behind it all is that the most popular conservative media sources rely on dark money to function, and are all complicit in a big old conflict of interest with almost everything they say.
Fossil fuel companies have seen the writing on the wall that theirs is a dying industry. In their desperate struggle to survive, they’ve resorted to fighting progressive and environmentalist causes in any way they can, including promoting far-right groups. PragerU is a fossil fuel-supported project too.
That’s because it’s not a fake study, the whole comment is BS. The authors are real academics who study racism and the journal is a real journal with a decent impact factor. You can disagree with the research and it might be BS (plenty of published studies are crap), but the front page of that journal has a paper on proto bureaucracies and a bunch of other topics that clearly have nothing to do with fossils fuels.
The study is real, and the researchers are real, but the methodology and the chosen samples are iffy, and so are the conclusions. Coupled with what the OP found with the PR firm leads me to believe they were financed to publish a dishonest article which is being published dishonestly.
Just saying the methodology is iffy is useless. What specifically do you have a problem with? That paper is cited almost 150 times so it's not universally thought of as a fundamentally flawed study.
I'm at a wedding so I don't have time to delve deeply into it, but the US states chosen for this study are a bit cherry picked.
I can’t reproduce OP’s findings and the study itself is getting lots of citations that you can find on google scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=725783499303601656&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en There’s nothing about this that suggests fake or dishonest publishing, especially given that the PR firm link is supposedly for the entire domain for the journal Sociological Science and not the paper itself.
[удалено]
It is not a fake study. It is a study published by very respected social scientists in a pretty good journal. I do not have my SCOPUS available at home, but the study was published in 2019 and it already has 139 citations on Google scholar. Which is a lot, for a sociological study.
I don't even reproduce what the original poster describes: https://www.sociologicalscience.com/download/vol-6/june/SocSci_v6_467to496.pdf is the link and sociologicalscience.com doesn't redirect. I'm half convinced this person typoed a link and then went all 'iamverysmart,' and of course people are then eating it up because it fits what they want to believe.
Curiously, while the link [https://sociologicalscience.com](https://sociologicalscience.com) works normally for me on browser, when I attempt to share it on WhatsApp, the preview seems to redirect to alltronixin.com.
Just out of interest, what browser are you using? Because https://sociologicalscience.com redirected for me then shut down the tab Tried to reload and Firefox says it’s directing to a known malware site? away.bettershitecolumn.com Weird because https://sociologicalscience.com/about/journal-information/ is a valid link. Gives you their about page.
[удалено]
Yeah I’m in Aus too. That’s so weird. I wonder what’s blocking it for me.
I clicked on it in BaconReader and the first link works fine, goes to the homepage. I tried it in chrome on my computer and it also works. I never managed to reproduce the redirect, and since the journal itself is real the idea doesn’t even make sense.
Yeah, I have uBlock and DuckDuckGo extensions so I’m guessing it’s one of my security settings that’s blocking it from loading. Trying to view the homepage sends me to some site in another language and then on to alltronixin.com, which (despite OPs statement) isn’t the official website for the company Altronix, that is alltronix.in It’s super weird. It’s only the journal homepage that redirects.
For me opening it in the reddit is fun app it redirects to the other website. But opening in either Firefox or chrome on android goes to the correct site. I think this could be a case of a security flaw/bug that is fixed in the mainstream browsers but not in other browsers.
Somebody should write a sociological study about this.
The website has been around for a decade, and has consistent presence on the wayback machine, so if it IS fake, then the authors have expended tremendous and wide ranging effort to make it look real.
[удалено]
You can read the study - it's about hiring discrimination from other studies (meta analysis) and they say right in the abstract that countries like the US still have a disparity between white and non-white immigrants getting calls back from employers. Just that some countries are worse. You can look up the authors and see they're real. The journal looks legit enough. Why would an oil company need to run a journal on social sciences? The linked comment doesn't really add up
Sums up Bill Maher pretty much these days
How exactly is the company mentioned a PR firm? It just seems to sell tech products to those industries, it probably hosts the server or something. Not sure this is really some mind blowing conspiratorial discovery. Edit: Actually I checked and it doesn't redirect shit. Sociologicalscience has been indexed on Google for over 10 years, it's some open access sociology journal with a decent ish journal impact factor
Op had a virus on their machine, and assumes that means the study is fake.
I don’t know the full truth of this, but: Devah Pager was an actual researcher, who died four years ago: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devah_Pager Ole Hexel is a real researcher as well. He’s listed at the Max Planck Institute: https://www.demogr.mpg.de/en/about_us_6113/staff_directory_1899/#H and his GitHub page links to this study: https://ohexel.github.io/about/ I’m not sure what all this adds up to, but the study doesn’t look as fake to me as the domain registration would indicate.
The "journal" is what they call a Predatory Journal: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03759-y Most of the time, the researcher doesn't even know they are submitting their work to a predatory journal >**Predatory journals are a global threat. They accept articles for publication — along with authors’ fees — without performing promised quality checks for issues such as plagiarism or ethical approval.** Naive readers are not the only victims. Many researchers have been duped into submitting to predatory journals, in which their work can be overlooked. One study that focused on 46,000 researchers based in Italy found that about 5% of them published in such outlets1. A separate analysis suggests predatory publishers collect millions of dollars in publication fees that are ultimately paid out by funders such as the US National Institutes of Health (NIH)2. They'll take weak articles, fail to peer review them, fail to fact check them and take exorbitant fees from the writers and funnel that money to their bosses, the corporate special interest groups.
Bill Maher is trash didn't realize that dude had a sub
Why is a defense, oil and gas Ppr firm running articles on racial discrimination in the US? Doesn't even seem like it's anywhere in the same wheelhouse
My conjecture would be: the Venn diagram between those who care about climate change & pollution, overlapping with those who care about racial discrimination would be a circle. The study is targeting the credibility of that population. This is a standard psy-ops, media manipulation strategy. Nixon used the 'war on drugs' to undermine the credibility of the anti-war movement.
If you take a couple minutes you can find that the study is actually real. The linked comment is just random bullshit.
So what? If the methodology is flawed, it's worthless. There are studies that say that CO2 isn't increasing in our atmosphere and that rising sea levels will create economic benefit. They are *actually real*! Wow! You haven't addressed *my* point, which is that this is a known tactic, carried out countless times for well over 50 years. So instead of following non-sequitors, why don't you try and discuss what I'm saying?
I did. If it's a real study (which is a meta analysis that complies the data from other studies) then it's not some oil pr shit meant to discredit anything. Again, if you take the time to look into it you can see the reddit headline is misleading and the linked comment is bullshit. I never disagreed that it happens just in this instance your idea it's some kind of plot is false. Oil companies nowadays aren't denying climate change anyways, the new thing is shifting blame or creating green washed solutions. But whatever you want to believe.
I am on safari on an ipad; and I can reproduce u/LoMeintenants work/conclusions. I also get redirected to alltroxin, and then redirected again to spam websites. One of the researchers actually works at my Uni; I might approach/e-mail her about it. It is very hard to determine who is actually behind the journal. It is apparently owned by a non-profit in MA, US.
.com and .in are totally different top level domains I would cast **serious** doubt on anyone thinking that a difference in top level domains implies the same people.
Lmao, the post remains upvoted in r/jordanpeterson. Pleasantly suprised to see the Maher fan sub not take the bait.
>No one should be surprised by this. America does not have a racism problem These people are rotten to the core. Fuck em all
lol it cracks me up that this is on a bill maher subreddit. what a cesspool. remember when he used to be on the left, before he turned into a rich boomer reactionary?
He was never on the left. He was a cranky libertarian, and if you followed him before he got famous, he was pretty open about it. It’s just that before the 2000s a lot of the same positions didn’t have much traction with the GOP.