# AOC as James Mason in The Verdict - Not a Good Look **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 25, 2019, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289 "2019-10-25T18:34:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/1 "2019-10-25T18:34:26Z")
What the hell was with AOC, trying to come off like Ed Concannon, as played by James Mason in _[The Verdict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Verdict)_ with [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voDB5w5YVMU) yesterday? A question as phrased was, essentially, “would you run an ad by a Democrat saying his opponent supported the Green New Deal”? Total bullshit question. First off, if there _is_ a Republican who supports it, why would they NOT run it? Obviously her implication was that no Republican would ever do such a thing, so she wanted to know if Facebook would run an ad with “disinformation” in it. But no, that would be too simple a way to pose the question, now wouldn’t it? Why be clear and concise when you can obfuscate in an attempt to make someone look like a fool? In other moments, Zuckerberg stated that an ad giving a wrong election date would be taken down, but when he tried to explain that he is of the opinion that in a democracy, he believes people should be able to judge the character of politicians themselves, she cut him off. In fairness, he was able to get his answer out but, Concannon, excuse me, Ocasio-Cortez, clearly wasn’t interested in the answer. Despite this obvious distinction, she was able say with a straight face that there was a simple yes or no answer to her question about taking down ads with lies in them. Finally, in a moment top-flight propogandists would be proud of, she waited until the end of her five minutes to pose a question about ongoing dinner parties with far-right hosts, where white supremacy is evidently made out to be a hoax, a rather long-winded question that Zuckerberg didn’t quite get. But no matter, the question was left to hang in the air as, oh well! she was just out of time. To be clear, this is not about whether Zuckerberg’s/Facebook’s policies are the best ones. I am not aware of them in detail. This is about the left’s ever-increasingly taking up the tactics of the right for political gain. Don’t get me started on Rachel Maddow for the last year or so! AOC should be better than this, and a few months ago, I think she was. This is not the right path for her to be going down. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/2 "2019-10-25T18:48:40Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > What the hell was with AOC, trying to come off like Ed Concannon, as played by James Mason in _[The Verdict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Verdict)_ with [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voDB5w5YVMU) yesterday? A question as phrased was, essentially, “would you run an ad by a Democrat saying his opponent supported the Green New Deal”? Total bullshit question. First off, if there _is_ a Republican who supports it, why would they NOT run it? Obviously her implication was that no Republican would ever do such a thing, so she wanted to know if Facebook would run an ad with “disinformation” in it. But no, that would be too simple a way to pose the question, now wouldn’t it? Why be clear and concise when you can obfuscate in an attempt to make someone look like a fool? _Is_ there a Republican who supports the Green New Deal? I’d be very surprised if there is, and even if you can find one, the point on her question is still pretty clear and obvious. I’m not really seeing how this is obfuscatory on AOC’s behalf. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/3 "2019-10-25T19:23:16Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > In other moments, Zuckerberg stated that an ad giving a wrong election date would be taken down, but when he tried to explain that he is of the opinion that in a democracy, he believes people should be able to judge the character of politicians themselves, How can voters judge the character of someone when they are fed disinformation about that person through media outlets like Facebook? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/4 "2019-10-25T19:41:50Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > How can voters judge the character of someone when they are fed disinformation about that person through media outlets like Facebook? Use more than one source of information? ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/5 "2019-10-25T20:00:25Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Use more than one source of information? I don’t need to get all my knowledge from Facebook? Tell me more. ---
**Author:** ![AlsoNamedBort](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alsonamedbort/32/3213_2.png) [@AlsoNamedBort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AlsoNamedBort)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/6 "2019-10-25T20:08:06Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > I don’t need to get all my knowledge from Facebook? Tell me more. You joke, but then remember that there are people who do that, _and they get to vote too._ ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/7 "2019-10-25T20:12:58Z")
Unfortunately for humanity there are lots and lots of really stupid people out there who believe any damn thing they see on Facebook. I will later watch the AOC clip, and perhaps chime in again once I am more familiar with this. If it’s early enough I will still be sober and more likely to be civil. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/8 "2019-10-25T20:17:19Z")
Hm, I thought AOC was being more Humbert Humbert-y, but there you go. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/9 "2019-10-25T21:10:19Z")
I clicked the AOC/Zuckerberg link in the OP, and it went to Faux news. I watched this 5-1/2 minute video of the testimony from PBS Newshour instead. Eh, she was trying to establish a line between what ads Facebook would publish and what they wouldn’t with respect to the inclusion of misinformation and lies in those ads. After watching the video, I can declare that my opinion of her in general, including her conduct during this questioning leave me proud to know that my tax dollars go toward paying her salary. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/10 "2019-10-25T21:20:14Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > I clicked the AOC/Zuckerberg link in the OP, and it went to Faux news. I watched this 5-1/2 minute video of the testimony from PBS Newshour instead. > > > Eh, she was trying to establish a line between what ads Facebook would publish and what they wouldn’t with respect to the inclusion of misinformation and lies in those ads. After watching the video, I can declare that my opinion of her in general, including her conduct during this questioning leave me proud to know that my tax dollars go toward paying her salary. She really is rather skilled at questioning. Which is why the right is so fascinated/afraid of her, which is why Fox covers her so much, in their own inimitable spun and edited way. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/11 "2019-10-25T21:23:20Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/12 "2019-10-25T21:59:36Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > What the hell was with AOC, trying to come off like Ed Concannon, as played by James Mason in _[The Verdict](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Verdict)_ with [Mark Zuckerberg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voDB5w5YVMU) yesterday? A question as phrased was, essentially, “would you run an ad by a Democrat saying his opponent supported the Green New Deal”? Total bullshit question. First off, if there _is_ a Republican who supports it, why would they NOT run it? Obviously her implication was that no Republican would ever do such a thing, so she wanted to know if Facebook would run an ad with “disinformation” in it. But no, that would be too simple a way to pose the question, now wouldn’t it? Why be clear and concise when you can obfuscate in an attempt to make someone look like a fool? > > In other moments, Zuckerberg stated that an ad giving a wrong election date would be taken down, but when he tried to explain that he is of the opinion that in a democracy, he believes people should be able to judge the character of politicians themselves, she cut him off. In fairness, he was able to get his answer out but, Concannon, excuse me, Ocasio-Cortez, clearly wasn’t interested in the answer. Despite this obvious distinction, she was able say with a straight face that there was a simple yes or no answer to her question about taking down ads with lies in them. Finally, in a moment top-flight propogandists would be proud of, she waited until the end of her five minutes to pose a question about ongoing dinner parties with far-right hosts, where white supremacy is evidently made out to be a hoax, a rather long-winded question that Zuckerberg didn’t quite get. But no matter, the question was left to hang in the air as, oh well! she was just out of time. > > To be clear, this is not about whether Zuckerberg’s/Facebook’s policies are the best ones. I am not aware of them in detail. This is about the left’s ever-increasingly taking up the tactics of the right for political gain. Don’t get me started on Rachel Maddow for the last year or so! AOC should be better than this, and a few months ago, I think she was. This is not the right path for her to be going down. …what the fuck is this bullshit? AOC’s questioning was entirely on-point and was probably the best of all the Democrats on display yesterday. Zuckerberg was evasive as fuck. What the fuck are you smoking? ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/13 "2019-10-25T22:17:19Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Use more than one source of information? And what if multiple stories from seemingly different sources reporting the same lie show up on your social media feeds? That’s not very difficult to arrange. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/14 "2019-10-25T22:18:32Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > Unfortunately for humanity there are lots and lots of really stupid people out there who believe any damn thing they see on Facebook. I will later watch the AOC clip, and perhaps chime in again once I am more familiar with this. If it’s early enough I will still be sober and more likely to be civil. After some BS humor site ran a “Pope Endorses trump” article, my wife was inundated from her FB friends about it. I knew from the get that it was bogus, not because the Pope _wouldn’t_ endorse trump, but because the Pope wouldn’t endorse _anybody_ because he’s, I don’t know, the freakin’ Pope. She had the great pleasure of linking to a site debunking this obvious (to anyone with at least two firing neurons) bit of balderdash. Meanwhile, trump is wondering if the Pope will endorse him again in 2020. ---
**Author:** ![Projammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/projammer/32/559_2.png) [@Projammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Projammer)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/15 "2019-10-25T22:37:02Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > …but, Concannon, excuse me, Ocasio-Cortez, clearly wasn’t interested in the answer. To be fair, finding any politician who’s interested in the answer is about as likely as finding a virgin at an ISIS goat farm. It’s all about sound bites and pandering to their constituency. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/16 "2019-10-25T23:12:59Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Use more than one source of information? That works if sources are generally truthful. If they don’t need to tell the truth, all you can expect from multiple sources is a random collection of lies. The press and media are afforded great legal protections. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for a certain amount of truthfulness from them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/17 "2019-10-25T23:32:30Z")
Watched snippets of that on Twitter the other day. It fascinates me on a psychological level how people can see totally different things when it comes to AOC. I had second-hand humiliation watching her obviously rehearsed pea-brain self question Zuckerberg about complete shit for the cameras and her soundbites & clips. She perfectly embodies and personifies the woke millennial liberal virtue-signaling liar. And she clearly does not understand or see the irony in her line of questioning. ---
**Author:** ![Annoyed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f04885/32.png) [@Annoyed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annoyed)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/18 "2019-10-25T23:36:15Z")
> [@Icarus](#): > > She really is rather skilled at questioning. Which is why the right is so fascinated/afraid of her, which is why Fox covers her so much, in their own inimitable spun and edited way. Going by that logic, then you and everyone else on this board who leans to the left must be absolutely quaking in terror of Donald Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/19 "2019-10-25T23:40:24Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > Going by that logic, then you and everyone else on this board who leans to the left must be absolutely quaking in terror of Donald Trump. He’s an idiot with access to nuclear weapons - _of course_ the left is terrified of him. The right should be, too. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289/20 "2019-10-25T23:41:12Z")
> [@Annoyed](#): > > Watched snippets of that on Twitter the other day. It fascinates me on a psychological level how people can see totally different things when it comes to AOC. > > I had second-hand humiliation watching her obviously rehearsed pea-brain self question Zuckerberg about complete shit for the cameras and her soundbites & clips. > > She perfectly embodies and personifies the woke millennial liberal virtue-signaling liar. > > And she clearly does not understand or see the irony in her line of questioning. It is fascinating all right, how when some woman actually researches her stuff before questioning someone that will allow misinformation to be distributed, is disparaged. > **[If you think AOC is being praised too much for challenging Mark Zuckerberg,...](https://news.yahoo.com/think-aoc-being-praised-too-205223984.html)** > > Facebook has again found itself in the firing line, this time by the US House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, over the launch of its cryptocurrency project, Libra. Given Facebook’s loose policies towards privacy, many lawmakers have... > [@](#): > > Ocasio-Cortez, appearing articulate, patient and composed, asked Zuckerberg a range of questions from when he first knew of Cambridge Analytica to Facebook’s failures in fact-checking political advertisements. Zuckerberg seemed jittery and nervous in contrast. “So, you won’t take down lies or you will take down lies? I think that’s just a pretty simple yes or no”, Ocasio-Cortez said at one point in frustration. Her insistence on clarity and truth seemed to contrast with his inability to be straightforward. > > We are now at a point where a congresswoman is praised for undertaking the exact role she is elected and paid to do. Now, nobody’s denying that Ocasio-Cortez is excellent at her job. Over the past year, the Representative of New York’s 14th district has been applauded for questioning Michael Cohen and the relationship between President Donald Trump and insurance fraud, probing CEOs of the largest financial institutions, and calling out Trump’s corruption during a “lightening round game” at the House Oversight Committee. But the disproportionate amount of praise heaped upon her is comparable to applauding every time a doctor accurately diagnoses a health condition. > > In comparison to Ocasio-Cortez, other congresspersons have been less enthused during congressional hearings, having seemingly not researched topics they are elected to scrutinize or the individuals they should be holding to account. The first time Zuckerberg sat through a Congress testimony, Zuckerberg smirked and giggled as he eased his way through tranquil lines of questioning, occasionally bewildered by the fact that he had to explain how the internet works to senators. Senator Brian Schatz reveled that he thought emails are sent through WhatsApp, and Senator Orinn Hatch failed to understand the concept of garnering revenue through advertising. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aoc-as-james-mason-in-the-verdict-not-a-good-look/842289.md?page=2)