> It was described as a propaganda network capable of controlling the narrative.
No, you added the second part. That could indeed bolster the argument, but it wasn't made in the initial claim.
If scope is the tipping point - which appears to be your argument here with regard to degree - recall my initial question was about the threshold. Which is conveniently what you're saying we should ignore because it's unimportant. So which is it?
I contend that one of the core tenets of "propaganda" is that there needs to be a deliberate and centralized. It's easy to call something propaganda but it's much harder to defend that claim.
There is no tipping point. The premise of a tipping point means you're still thinking about category instead of degree.
Also, when we say degree, we don't mean the degree to which the definition fits. That's a boring discussion. We simply mean the degree to which it's a problem.
Twitter, to the extent that it's being used as a propaganda network by CCP bots, which it is, is a big problem for us.
A small blog being used for propaganda... not such a big problem.
That's the difference that you're missing. The scale and scope is different. Therefore the extent to which they're important is different.
> There is no tipping point. The premise of a tipping point means you're still thinking about category instead of degree.
Quite the opposite. I've asked about degree the entire time. "Opinion" does not mean the same thing as "Propaganda," but the scale of the former could transform it into the latter.
What's the degree here? That's what I'm asking.
> That's a boring discussion.
This is dismissive. If you want to discuss things in good faith, please avoid language like this. You're refusing to engage with an aspect of my reply - and that's fine - but don't pretend my thought are meaningless or boring as a response.
You entered a conversation and started calling my points boring and meaningless; I don't sense you were looking for productive conversation from the get-go.
No, you added the second part. That could indeed bolster the argument, but it wasn't made in the initial claim.
If scope is the tipping point - which appears to be your argument here with regard to degree - recall my initial question was about the threshold. Which is conveniently what you're saying we should ignore because it's unimportant. So which is it?
I contend that one of the core tenets of "propaganda" is that there needs to be a deliberate and centralized. It's easy to call something propaganda but it's much harder to defend that claim.