The “Post Truth Society” o la gran era de las noticias falsas en el Perú

¿Te molestan algunas cosas que lees en internet?, ¿Si colman tu paciencia o te indignan, eres de los que las comparte y difunde en las redes sociales?, ¿odias a Castañeda Lossio, crees que Susana Villarán era una vaga, que Keiko es ociosa o PPK un lobista?, ¿Confirmas la fuente de lo que compartes?, ¿Confías ciegamente en internet?, ¿Sabías que tal vez podrias estar formando parte de una campaña de desinformación con esos sharing que haces a cada momento sobre algún tema determinado?

El ser humano es emotivo por naturaleza y puede reaccionar ante ciertos estímulos de una manera apasionada lo cual es aprovechado por expertos en comunicación para contraargumentar a sus opositores de turno (religiosos, políticos, ideológicos, culturales, etc) manipulando y evolucionando ideas que son compartidas en una comunidad determinada para generar una gran división que es el signo de lo que ultimamente se conoce como “Post Truth Era” o era del declive de la confianza en las instituciones o simplemente la era de las “Fake News” (noticias falsas).

La pérdida de credibilidad de muchas instituciones se da debido al actual estado de la tecnología e información, hoy todo es transparente y, sin embargo, se manipula la verdad para servir a la voluntad de cualquier ente opositor con la finalidad de difundir noticias falsas y lograr cohesión y polarizar una sociedad. Esta técnica es, ciertamente, lo mas bajo y vil que puede existir para lograr la popularidad de un concepto (idea, negocio o servicio) en el Internet. La búsqueda de atención y popularidad utilizando información manipulada y falsa es lo mas común que existe actualmente desde que se utiliza el sensacionalismo, el amarillismo o el escándalo para vender o hacer mas popular una idea. Lo malo de esta situación es que mantiene en la ignorancia a una comunidad bajo un velo de supuesta verdad.

El siguiente video nos muestra el punto de vista de este youtuber y que bien puede ser aplicado a la política peruana, a los ataques que vemos en las campañas políticas, la leyenda de los pishtacos en Huaycán, al actual debate de #conmishijosnotemetas y la denominada “ideología de género” entre grupos religiosos y el gobierno, el reconocimiento de la unión civil homosexual en el país, y hasta el asunto de los escándalos armados y que son transmitidos por los mas “reputados” medios de comunicación a través de sus infames “Reality Shows”.

Vivimos ahora en una sociedad donde todo ha perdido credibilidad gracias a la popularidad de los “Likes”, donde muchas personas ni se molestan en revisar la veracidad de lo que comparten o asumen ciegamente que todo lo que esta en internet es cierto. Esta situación nos llevará inexorablemente a la ignorancia y la división como sociedad en el futuro y todo ello con una finalidad: Controlarte a través de una ilusión.

En el siguiente video “Cómo Detectar a un Mentiroso”, Pamela Meyer nos cuenta en resumen que “la mentira es un acto cooperativo”, “la mentira es el intento por llenar un vacío y mostrar nuestros deseos” y que “las mentiras tienen un alto costo económico tanto a corto como a largo plazo”. Por último, la transparencia y el “oversharing” que vivimos actualmente puede, de hecho, cegarnos frente a la verdad de los hechos y llevarnos a perder confianza y credibilidad en las instituciones y sus “autoridades”.

Por ultimo, tenemos la opinion de Francis Fukuyama, quien menciona que al referirnos al concepto de “Post Truth Society” estamos frente a una situacion en la cual es posible afirmar cosas sin tener una base factica y, sin verguenza alguna, no hacemos diferencia entre una afirmacion verdadera o una falsa. Independientemente de su naturaleza, la gente seguira creyendo en ella. Asimismo, señala que esta situacion es el reflejo de algo profundo: La perdida de credibilidad de las autoridades e instituciones producto del estado de la tecnologia, disponibilidad de informacion y transparencia.

 

Mexicans Are Lazy | Ep. 7 | That’s Racist

Este comediante tira abajo algunos estereotipos que el comun de norteamericanos asigna a los inmigrantes mexicanos. Con un estilo simpatico pero tambien objetivo nos señala, por ejemplo, que el calificativo de “flojos” para los mexicanos se remonta a 1846 cuando gran parte del ahora territorio del Oeste estadounidense pertenecia a Mexico. Los norteamericanos señalaban que los mexicanos poseian en sus territorios grandes extensiones de tierra que no trabajaban y basados en el espiritu de trabajo protestante, pues era menester hacer productivas aquellas tierras asi sea quitandoselas a Mexico por la fuerza.

Changes to Parole and Expedited Removal Policies Affecting Cuban Nationals

The Cuban Adjustment Act (Public Law 89-732) (CAA) became law on November 2, 1966. Section 1 of the Act was designed to permit thousands of Cuban refugees to adjust to lawful permanent residence. Most of these Cubans were parolees or nonimmigrants who could not return to Cuba for political reasons, but could not seek residence through other means. Similar laws have been passed over the years for other nationalities as well, e.g., Public Law 101-167 (for former nationals of the Soviet Union, Laotians, Cambod ians, and Vietnamese).

Image: http://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_hero_image/public/reuters/cnews-us-usa-cuba-obama_1.jpg?itok=FCDL4kW9

Image: http://cdn.thefiscaltimes.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_hero_image/public/reuters/cnews-us-usa-cuba-obama_1.jpg?itok=FCDL4kW9

WASHINGTON- Today, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson announced several changes to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policies and regulations affecting Cuban nationals. These changes reflect the reestablishment of full diplomatic relations with Cuba and other concrete steps toward the normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations, as well as Cuba’s agreement to accept and facilitate the repatriation of Cuban nationals who are ordered removed from the United States. The changes represent another important step in the normalization of the migration relationship between the two countries, and are intended to ensure regular, safe, and orderly migration between them.

WHAT IS CHANGING?

Beginning today, DHS has rescinded certain policies unique to Cuban nationals. Specifically, DHS has eliminated a special parole policy for arriving Cuban nationals commonly known as the “wet-foot/dry-foot” policy, as well as a policy for Cuban medical professionals known as the Cuban Medical Professional Parole Program. It is now Department policy to consider any requests for such parole in the same manner as parole requests filed by nationals of other countries.

DHS is also eliminating an exemption that previously prevented the use of expedited removal proceedings for Cuban nationals apprehended at ports of entry or near the border.

The existing Cuban Family Reunification Parole Program is not affected by this announcement and remains in effect.

WHY THE CHANGE?

For decades, DHS and the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have had special policies for considering parole requests from Cuban nationals. Those policies were justified by certain unique circumstances, including conditions in Cuba, the lack of diplomatic relations between our countries, and the Cuban Government’s general refusal to accept the repatriation of its nationals.

In December 2014, the President announced a historic opening between the United States and Cuba, as well as an approach for reestablishing diplomatic relations and adjusting regulations to facilitate greater travel, commerce, people-to-people ties, and the free flow of information to, from, and within Cuba. Since that announcement, the United States and Cuba have reestablished full diplomatic relations and taken concrete steps towards enhancing security, building bridges between our peoples, and promoting economic prosperity for citizens of both countries.

DHS has also recently seen a significant increase in attempts by Cuban nationals to enter the United States without authorization. Many of those Cuban nationals have taken a dangerous journey through Central America and Mexico; others have taken to the high seas in the dangerous attempt to cross the Straits of Florida. This marked increase in actual and attempted migration has been driven in part by the perception that there is a limited window before the United States eliminates favorable immigration policies for Cuban nationals.

In light of these factors, the Secretary of Homeland Security has determined it is time to adjust the special parole policies for Cuban nationals. Considering the reestablishment of full diplomatic relations, Cuba’s signing of a Joint Statement obligating it to accept the repatriation of its nationals who arrive in the United States after the date of the agreement, and other factors, the Secretary concluded that, with the limited exception of the Cuban Family Reunification Parole Program, the parole policies discussed above are no longer warranted.

CUBAN ADJUSTMENT ACT AND THE CUBAN “WET-FOOT/DRY-FOOT” POLICY

Under the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, the status of any Cuban national may be adjusted to that of a lawful permanent resident (i.e., “green card” status) if he or she (1) was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States, (2) has been physically present in the United States for at least one year, and (3) is otherwise admissible.

The policy commonly known as “wet-foot/dry-foot” generally refers to an understanding under which Cuban migrants traveling to the United States who are intercepted at sea (“wet foot”) are returned to Cuba or resettled in a third country, while those who make it to U.S. soil (“dry foot”) are able to request parole and, if granted, lawful permanent resident status under the Cuban Adjustment Act.

The former INS established a policy strongly encouraging the parole of Cuban nationals who arrived in the United States so that they could apply for relief under the Cuban Adjustment Act. Secretary Johnson is rescinding this outdated INS policy.

EXPEDITED REMOVAL

DHS has the authority to effectuate the removal of certain categories of individuals, including those apprehended at ports of entry or near the border, through what is known as expedited removal. Under longstanding law and policies, however, Cuban nationals were exempt from being removed through expedited removal proceedings.

In light of recent changes in the relationship between the United States and Cuba, the Secretary has determined that such exemptions for Cuban nationals are no longer warranted. Today, the Department is amending its regulations and issuing a notice in the Federal Register to remove such exemptions from policies governing the use of expedited removal for Cuban nationals who arrive by air, land, and sea. Effective immediately, Cuban nationals who are apprehended at ports of entry or near the border may be placed into expedited removal proceedings in the same manner as nationals of other countries.

CUBAN MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL PAROLE PROGRAM

On August 11, 2006, DHS announced it would allow certain Cuban medical personnel in third countries (i.e., not Cuba or the United States) to apply for parole. Applicants under the Cuban Medical Professional Parole (CMPP) program were required to show that they were medical professionals currently conscripted to study or work in a third country under the direction of the Cuban Government. Individuals could apply for parole at a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office, or U.S. embassy or consulate, located in the third country. Their immediate family members were also potentially eligible for parole.

In accordance with the Joint Statement, DHS will no longer accept parole applications from medical professionals under the CMPP program.

CUBAN FAMILY REUNIFICATION PAROLE PROGRAM

The Cuban Family Reunification Parole program allows beneficiaries of certain approved family-sponsored immigrant visa petitions to travel to the United States before their immigrant visas become available, rather than remain in Cuba to await a visa. The program seeks to expedite family reunification through safe, legal, and orderly channels of migration to the United States and discourage dangerous and irregular maritime migration.

DHS has determined that this program will remain in place because it serves other national interests.

January 12, 2017

In: dhs.gov: Changes to Parole and Expedited Removal Policies Affecting Cuban Nationals 

La OTAN está preocupada por la opinión de Trump de que está “obsoleta”, según Steinmeier

Imagen: https://www.deutschland.de/sites/default/files/styles/stage/public/article_images/pimg_239772_Foreign-Policy-Common-Foreign-and-Security-Policy-Frank-Walter-Steinmeier-European-Union-International-Politics_A.jpg?itok=w-6FPv8g

Imagen: https://www.deutschland.de/sites/default/files/styles/stage/public/article_images/pimg_239772_Foreign-Policy-Common-Foreign-and-Security-Policy-Frank-Walter-Steinmeier-European-Union-International-Politics_A.jpg?itok=w-6FPv8g

El titular de Asuntos Exteriores alemán, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, señaló hoy que la OTAN ha recibido “con preocupación” las palabras del presidente electo estadounidense, Donald Trump, que en una entrevista al diario alemán “Bild” y al británico “The Times” califica la Alianza de “obsoleta”.

Steinmeier, que hizo estas declaraciones tras reunirse con el secretario general de la OTAN, Jens Stoltenberg, dijo que dichos comentarios respecto a la Alianza se contradicen con las palabras pronunciadas por el designado secretario de Defensa de EEUU, James Mattis, en su audiencia ante el Congreso.

“Tenemos que ver qué consecuencias tendrá para la política estadounidense”, indicó el jefe de la diplomacia alemana.

El ministro aclaró además que los comentarios vertidos por Trump en su entrevista “influirán, si no definirán” la agenda de hoy en Bruselas.

Steinmeier, que se encuentra en la capital belga en la que será su última reunión como ministro de Exteriores antes de someterse el próximo día 12 como candidato consensuado por la gran coalición que lidera la canciller alemana, Angela Merkel, a su elección como presidente de Alemania, señaló que las declaraciones de Trump han causado “sorpresa y revuelo” no sólo en Bruselas.

Por otra parte, el ministro se mostró preocupado respecto al anuncio de Trump de introducir gravámenes del 35 % a las importaciones de coches alemanes si sus fabricantes no instalan sus plantas en Estados Unidos.

“Partimos de la base de que nuestro socio estadounidense continuará respetando las obligaciones internacionales y las reglas de la OMC”, la Organización Mundial del Comercio, que en principio debe aprobar antes de su imposición cualquier tipo de gravamen, dijo.

En: eldiario.es