this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
536 points (98.6% liked)
Political Memes
5413 readers
2820 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't know anything at all about the Fauci situation, except that real or imagined that whole kerfuffle will have horrible ramifications for years to come. And now the Harvard president being discovered to have committed literal plagiarism aka fraud... in the latter case at least, stop proving the Alt-Right actually correct!:-(
It's going to embolden their supporters who are tired, busy, some maybe single parents, many of whom lack any kind of degree and especially a graduate one, all the more so in a related field, so then when they DO manage to dig deeper into a situation like the president's academic dishonesty, they will feel vindicated and trust those who told them that story in other situations as well.
Fortunately there are efforts such as this amazing anti-anti-vaccine video, but still it's hard to fight each new aspect of misinformation as it comes along, especially when the Alt-Right manages to work in such a "victory"
The Harvard president did not commit fraud. This was an entirely political hit. The thing the right called plagiarism was literally her quoting and citing sources like you're supposed to. But of course they don't know that.
The facts are super complicated. For one thing, supposedly the author herself wrote to the journal after-the-fact acknowledging her error. Whether she forgot the quote marks and citation part initially or what, she was not careful in such matters. Also she only had like four papers? It seems like there is smoke there, I am saying, regardless of whether or not there is an actual fire, hence perhaps not solely a political hit.
Edit: to anyone who wants to down-vote this, feel free, though you'd have a better chance at changing my mind if you leave a comment with a link for me something to read? Otherwise, I have read at least a little about this - have you? If you are interested in a real discussion rather than reinforcing your preferred set of facts inside of a mere echo chamber, let me know...