pull down to refresh
Bias is one thing. Blatant manipulation and lies are more serious and should be dismissed.
I honestly can not believe it. This is an orwellian level of manipulation of information. My first lecture is that they are desperate because, indeed, this is working, and they have interests that depend on Milei being proved wrong.
journalist Matt Kennard talks about this exact thing. there's probably many journos who discuss this, but ive listened to couple of his podcast interviews
he started in Financial Times but is now with an independent org and his angle is that essentially corporate interests, eg the Gates Foundation when it comes to The Guardian, control the media and what can and can't be said and that one of the prime ways they do it is by what they leave out of a story
Poverty soars above 50 percent
What was the poverty rate before? Hyperinflation means more people fall below the so called poverty line.
Let’s interview all the overpaid government workers who have to seek productive jobs
Exactly.
I already didn’t trust the article when I saw that it’s from The Guardian. Thanks for setting the record straight
Always Sr 🫡
Thanks for setting things straight. Good to have reports from boots on the ground.
At your service Sr, and thank you for bringing up the subject, we didn't saw it here yet and I presume they might have tried to limit demographic visibility to avoid immediate backlash from us, so that they can achieve the desired impact effect, which is the one that will shape public opinion the most even if latter proved false. It's a classic manipulation strategy, we know all of them here...
The Guardian's problem is not boots on the ground. They can spread lies and manipulation from wherever, Argentina, England, doesn't matter. The problem is the writer not the location
Yes but I think he means that I'm here reporting first hand accounts which is the best way to counter misinformation.
I understand
My point is the Guardian location doesn’t matter. A Guardian reporter in Argentina will still criticize Milei policies such as ending rent control and monetary and fiscal austerity.
Reporting from Argentina, Milei has vetoed a right to free housing
Exactly.
Maybe you could provide some data too?
Let's take the exact same data the article is citing: if you click the link that says "to almost 53%" right at the beginning, it leads you to this article from Reuters. In the article, they state that they take the tendency from "The Catholic University of Argentina's (UCA) observatory":
The Catholic University of Argentina's (UCA) observatory had estimated the poverty rate soared to 55.5% in the first quarter of the year before easing to 49.4% in the second quarter, giving a 52% average for the first six months of this year.
You can start seeing the cracks there. Now it turns out that if we increase the resolution, closer to the beginning of the mandate we were up 3 points from now. Stretching the data is a classical manipulation to conceal tendency. This is coming explicitly from their own source.
So, let's take a look even closer, again, from their own source: this article is from February, also from UCA's data. See what's the estimated poverty rate right on January:
Now it turns out that if we increase the resolution even further, the poverty rate right on January was estimated on 57,4%. How convenient to average that along the entire quarter and giving you that as "data point", isn't?
Javier Milei's mandate started on December.
It won’t make a difference
Oliver hates Javier because he isn’t a socialist
I trust @didiplaywell as little as I trust govts and media.
The rest from you are bullshits, which you know very well but still repeat as a broken record.
Sorry, I am not able to follow your line of argumentation. What was the poverty in Dec 2023/Jan 2024? I assume your chart shows a prediction for Dec 2023 and Jan 2024, or? What is the poverty now or last month or whatever? No predictions, hard numbers.
They don't provide that data for some reason, the only hard data is the one for "the first quarter". We can already see the manipulation from there: besides the fact Milei's measures on cutting spending weren't immediate nor took immediate effect, the article speaks about "soaring" poverty, while the exact same source states it has reduced from the peak reached at the beginning of the mandate.
INDEC and UCA are two different sources, or? On a positive side, I could imagine even a better clickbait article just by ignoring all UCA’s statements, Reuters didn’t.
INDEC and UCA are indeed two different sources, but the only part of Reuters' article that uses INDEC as source is the graph (which they did themselves, for INDEC do not publishes in english). So I concentrate on UCA because besides the graph all information cited comes from it, and it's more telling to have that contrast of the source with itself, and UCA is not a state dependency, which INDEC is and thus I assume you will trust less.
You don’t care about the data because no amount of it will change your mind about Javier or anyone you despise
The fact that you wanted the status quo to remain in place in Argentina speaks volumes of your character and ideology
You can never hate the corporate media enough. They are the enemy of the people.
Syndicate mob of ex government employees
Rent control in Argentina
Never trust media.