this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
722 points (98.9% liked)

News

21897 readers
3602 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] variants@possumpat.io 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I have no idea why you're being downvoted.

Probably because shooting a random dolphin isn't great

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Yeah taking “single dolphin shot repeatedly” to “but what about the fishing industry” isn’t a productive take, it’s whataboutism. They are independent issues, and trying to put focus on one removes the focus from the other

[–] amzd@kbin.social 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think it's good to make people connect their disdain for animal abuse to something they can actually do something about

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I don't think this is whataboutism in its most deflective form; I think it's, "Why are we concerned about a one-off incident but not looking at the elephant in the room?"

I guess I don't consider things whtaaboutism if it's pointing to something that encapsulates the original issue. These issues are not mutually-exclusive and signal the same problem: It's just asking why people are inconsistent with their outrage. In other words, whataboutism in this context can be effective when pointing out hypocrisy and double-standards.

To contrast, whataboutism as a deflection tends to be a substitute for, "You did it, too! Thus ignore what I did / what I did wrong is justified." Again, this is not that.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Except one (shooting a dolphin repeatedly) is an act of sport or maliciousness, while the slaughter of marine mammals is an issue of the fishing industry. It’s like someone locking someone up in their basement vs the unjust imprisonment for many inmates that happens in the US. One is personal, and specific, one is systemic, happens all the time, and needs to be approached with a broader scope. They are all wrong, but you can’t lump them together because you are generally upset

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think we can absolutely say that industrialized slaughter is objectively worse in terms of the scale of suffering for the victims. We abstract the moral suffering in the fishing farm; but whoa, if someone individually shoots an animal — totally different! At the end of the day, scale is what matters.

Personally I couldn't care less about the assailant's state of mind; what matters is the victim

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I never said one was worse, I just said that derailing the conversation of one to focus on the other wasn’t productive

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I disagree because it connects two topics — one that is generally accepted by society — to another that everyone perceives as wrong because of an intimate emotional reaction.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Sure, but instead of saying “what about the shit they are doing to other sea life,” it could be worded as “this is a good time to check up on what’s going on with the fishing industry in general, here’s some links, and ways you can help”

One is just telling people they are assholes for even caring about the shot dolphin and should be better people by caring about bigger issues, the other is knowing people will care about the emotional story and then guiding them to learn more about the shit that happens in the fishing industry. People are emotional, you can’t just say “hey dummies what about this” and expect it to connect, it doesn’t help, you need to guide people.

Saying this is unimportant and people should focus elsewhere is disruptive and doesn’t move people toward bigger issues. Connecting this to bigger issues through conversation and generally better rhetoric does

[–] aiccount@monyet.cc 2 points 2 months ago

This is a really great way to phrase it. I am very curious to see if this difference in phrasing would really be received differently than the more blunt approach, which certainly doesn't seem to work for most people. Hopefully, we will all have AIs soon that can spoon feed anyone who can't connect the dots on their own.

It blows my mind that people can be reminded of the mass slaughter that is happening daily and think that it must somehow be excusing the one-off brutal slaughter of an individual. I always just assume that people hate to be reminded of the implication of their "sustainable" wild caught tuna or whatever.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Can't argue with that, I agree!

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 months ago

It's a one time incident. This is like when everyone lost their minds when a single turtle got a straw stuck in its nose. I'm not saying that wasn't a bad thing. Just like I never said someone shooting a dolphin isn't horrible.

But why offer a 20K reward for this while completely ignoring the mass slaughter taking place every day? Talk about unproductive.