It goes without saying that we have to discern. If masses of people have no discernment, the result is masses of sheeple. And who among us is so enlightened they can judge and label misinformation? I read the studies, and some of it is not convincing. To a scientist, it is obvious that even scientists can be deceiving when misguided by agendas or affiliations. Don’t be too quick to label anyone as anything. It reduces credibility and draws people without discernment into the lowest common denominator. Let the chaff blow off and seek the truth for yourself, people. Thank you for your research, Mr. Taylor.
Those of us who have not surrendered our brains to TikTok are now modern day versions of Diogenes, searching for truth. I cling to the tagline of The X Files: "The truth is out there!"
I'm too lazy to go and verify the veracity of the last 2 laws you outlined. So it comes down to trust. Many such people earn the trust of the ones listening and then they spread misinformation easier because people simply trust them and whatever they say.
So true, Monica. It's almost predictable how some/most people trying to make a living online will eventually notice: "Hey, if I make bolder and more controversial claims, regardless of their truthfulness, I get more likes and engagement". Cue vicious cycle.
"At the same time, we shouldn’t panic (yet). Studies in Europe and the US tend to find that online misinformation represents between 0.7% and 6% of people’s news diets - rising up to 10% on certain social media platforms (*cough* Facebook/Meta *cough*)"
I wonder about the methodology here, and maybe it's just my blind spot, but it feels like so much more. It might also have something to do with living in Florida lol
I've had a rule for the past couple of years that I don't believe any single thing I read on social media. If I can confirm it with a reliable legacy institution, preferably multiple trustworthy sources, I'll believe it. This has driven a brutal wedge between myself and others. It's making relating difficult. It's even hard to get along with friends who I mostly talked with about sports, as our "shared" world of mutually agreed upon facts is getting smaller and smaller until the point when we no longer share enough mutual understanding/knowledge to hold a meaningful conversation.
That's a great point. I think that the 'shared world' issue is very important, especially now that almost everything is 'algorithmically personalized' (not to mention the prevalence of clickbait and the primacy of engagement over accuracy).
It goes without saying that we have to discern. If masses of people have no discernment, the result is masses of sheeple. And who among us is so enlightened they can judge and label misinformation? I read the studies, and some of it is not convincing. To a scientist, it is obvious that even scientists can be deceiving when misguided by agendas or affiliations. Don’t be too quick to label anyone as anything. It reduces credibility and draws people without discernment into the lowest common denominator. Let the chaff blow off and seek the truth for yourself, people. Thank you for your research, Mr. Taylor.
Thanks, Sara.
I agree entirely. Always question, even yourself.
Sorry, Gunnar. I had you confused with Mr. Taylor. Thank you for Your research and time! :)
Haha, no worries, Sara. Thank you for reading and commenting!
Love it!.
We are lazy.
It is easier to let fake news flourish than to refute the nonsense in its novelty.
Geoff
Thanks, Geoff.
Those of us who have not surrendered our brains to TikTok are now modern day versions of Diogenes, searching for truth. I cling to the tagline of The X Files: "The truth is out there!"
Now all we've got to do is find it. :)
I'm too lazy to go and verify the veracity of the last 2 laws you outlined. So it comes down to trust. Many such people earn the trust of the ones listening and then they spread misinformation easier because people simply trust them and whatever they say.
So true, Monica. It's almost predictable how some/most people trying to make a living online will eventually notice: "Hey, if I make bolder and more controversial claims, regardless of their truthfulness, I get more likes and engagement". Cue vicious cycle.
"At the same time, we shouldn’t panic (yet). Studies in Europe and the US tend to find that online misinformation represents between 0.7% and 6% of people’s news diets - rising up to 10% on certain social media platforms (*cough* Facebook/Meta *cough*)"
I wonder about the methodology here, and maybe it's just my blind spot, but it feels like so much more. It might also have something to do with living in Florida lol
I've had a rule for the past couple of years that I don't believe any single thing I read on social media. If I can confirm it with a reliable legacy institution, preferably multiple trustworthy sources, I'll believe it. This has driven a brutal wedge between myself and others. It's making relating difficult. It's even hard to get along with friends who I mostly talked with about sports, as our "shared" world of mutually agreed upon facts is getting smaller and smaller until the point when we no longer share enough mutual understanding/knowledge to hold a meaningful conversation.
That's a great point. I think that the 'shared world' issue is very important, especially now that almost everything is 'algorithmically personalized' (not to mention the prevalence of clickbait and the primacy of engagement over accuracy).