2 ms·
Again, and with emphasis, GIVEN the spread of misinformation was a significant contributor to the election results... In other words, assuming Trump benefited f
by the_gastropod 10y ago
Again, and with emphasis, GIVEN the spread of misinformation was a significant contributor to the election results... In other words, assuming Trump benefited from misinformation [more than Clinton], then the results are justifiably frustrating.
I'm not claiming whether or not Trump did or did not benefit more from misinformation. But if he did, I think my point is fair.
- mc32 10y agoWhat do you mean by significant? 1-2% of articles had misinformation, of that percentage a fraction (unknown, reportedly small) were politically related. How do we go from "there were articles containing misinformation" to those articles contributed to the outcome of the election? We simply dont know. We know both sides enjoyed having articles denouncing the other side, but we don't know if they had any effect. In terms of persuasion, friends family likely had more influence than this small percentage of made up news articles, should we get the pitchforks for misinformed friends too?